forked from TrueCloudLab/distribution
636a19b212
Adding docs build to the Makefile Adding in Sven's changes to the Makefile Removing DS_store file Updating per Stephen's comments Update with Stephen's final comment Signed-off-by: Mary Anthony <mary@docker.com>
413 lines
17 KiB
Markdown
413 lines
17 KiB
Markdown
# Docker Registry v2 authentication via central service
|
|
|
|
Today a Docker Registry can run in standalone mode in which there are no
|
|
authorization checks. While adding your own HTTP authorization requirements in
|
|
a proxy placed between the client and the registry can give you greater access
|
|
control, we'd like a native authorization mechanism that's public key based
|
|
with access control lists managed separately with the ability to have fine
|
|
granularity in access control on a by-key, by-user, by-namespace, and
|
|
by-repository basis. In v1 this can be configured by specifying an
|
|
`index_endpoint` in the registry's config. Clients present tokens generated by
|
|
the index and tokens are validated on-line by the registry with every request.
|
|
This results in a complex authentication and authorization loop that occurs
|
|
with every registry operation. Some people are very familiar with this image:
|
|
|
|
![index auth](https://docs.docker.com/static_files/docker_pull_chart.png)
|
|
|
|
The above image outlines the 6-step process in accessing the Official Docker
|
|
Registry.
|
|
|
|
1. Contact the Docker Hub to know where I should download “samalba/busybox”
|
|
2. Docker Hub replies:
|
|
a. samalba/busybox is on Registry A
|
|
b. here are the checksums for samalba/busybox (for all layers)
|
|
c. token
|
|
3. Contact Registry A to receive the layers for samalba/busybox (all of them to
|
|
the base image). Registry A is authoritative for “samalba/busybox” but keeps
|
|
a copy of all inherited layers and serve them all from the same location.
|
|
4. Registry contacts Docker Hub to verify if token/user is allowed to download
|
|
images.
|
|
5. Docker Hub returns true/false lettings registry know if it should proceed or
|
|
error out.
|
|
6. Get the payload for all layers.
|
|
|
|
The goal of this document is to outline a way to eliminate steps 4 and 5 from
|
|
the above process by using cryptographically signed tokens and no longer
|
|
require the client to authenticate each request with a username and password
|
|
stored locally in plain text.
|
|
|
|
The new registry workflow is more like this:
|
|
|
|
![v2 registry auth](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1EHZU9uBLmcH0kytDClBv6jv6WR4xZjE8RKEUw1mARJA/pub?w=480&h=360)
|
|
|
|
1. Attempt to begin a push/pull operation with the registry.
|
|
2. If the registry requires authorization it will return a `401 Unauthorized`
|
|
HTTP response with information on how to authenticate.
|
|
3. The registry client makes a request to the authorization service for a
|
|
signed JSON Web Token.
|
|
4. The authorization service returns a token.
|
|
5. The client retries the original request with the token embedded in the
|
|
request header.
|
|
6. The Registry authorizes the client and begins the push/pull session as
|
|
usual.
|
|
|
|
## Requirements
|
|
|
|
- Registry Clients capable of generating key pairs which can be used to
|
|
authenticate to an authorization server.
|
|
- An authorization server capable of managing user accounts, their public keys,
|
|
and access controls to their resources hosted by any given service (such as
|
|
repositories in a Docker Registry).
|
|
- A Docker Registry capable of trusting the authorization server to sign tokens
|
|
which clients can use for authorization and the ability to verify these
|
|
tokens for single use or for use during a sufficiently short period of time.
|
|
|
|
## Authorization Server Endpoint Descriptions
|
|
|
|
This document borrows heavily from the [JSON Web Token Draft Spec](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-oauth-json-web-token-32)
|
|
|
|
The described server is meant to serve as a user account and key manager and a
|
|
centralized access control list for resources hosted by other services which
|
|
wish to authenticate and manage authorizations using this services accounts and
|
|
their public keys.
|
|
|
|
Such a service could be used by the official docker registry to authenticate
|
|
clients and verify their authorization to docker image repositories.
|
|
|
|
Docker will need to be updated to interact with an authorization server to get
|
|
an authorization token.
|
|
|
|
## How to authenticate
|
|
|
|
Today, registry clients first contact the index to initiate a push or pull.
|
|
For v2, clients should contact the registry first. If the registry server
|
|
requires authentication it will return a `401 Unauthorized` response with a
|
|
`WWW-Authenticate` header detailing how to authenticate to this registry.
|
|
|
|
For example, say I (username `jlhawn`) am attempting to push an image to the
|
|
repository `samalba/my-app`. For the registry to authorize this, I either need
|
|
`push` access to the `samalba/my-app` repository or `push` access to the whole
|
|
`samalba` namespace in general. The registry will first return this response:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
HTTP/1.1 401 Unauthorized
|
|
WWW-Authenticate: Bearer realm="https://auth.docker.com/v2/token/",service="registry.docker.com",scope="repository:samalba/my-app:push"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This format is documented in [Section 3 of RFC 6750: The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: Bearer Token Usage](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6750#section-3)
|
|
|
|
The client will then know to make a `GET` request to the URL
|
|
`https://auth.docker.com/v2/token/` using the `service` and `scope` values from
|
|
the `WWW-Authenticate` header.
|
|
|
|
## Requesting a Token
|
|
|
|
#### Query Parameters
|
|
|
|
<dl>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>service</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The name of the service which hosts the resource.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>scope</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The resource in question, formatted as one of the space-delimited
|
|
entries from the <code>scope</code> parameters from the <code>WWW-Authenticate</code> header
|
|
shown above. This query parameter should be specified multiple times if
|
|
there is more than one <code>scope</code> entry from the <code>WWW-Authenticate</code>
|
|
header. The above example would be specified as:
|
|
<code>scope=repository:samalba/my-app:push</code>.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>account</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The name of the account which the client is acting as. Optional if it
|
|
can be inferred from client authentication.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
</dl>
|
|
|
|
#### Description
|
|
|
|
Requests an authorization token for access to a specific resource hosted by a
|
|
specific service provider. Requires the client to authenticate either using a
|
|
TLS client certificate or using basic authentication (or any other kind of
|
|
digest/challenge/response authentication scheme if the client doesn't support
|
|
TLS client certs). If the key in the client certificate is linked to an account
|
|
then the token is issued for that account key. If the key in the certificate is
|
|
linked to multiple accounts then the client must specify the `account` query
|
|
parameter. The returned token is in JWT (JSON Web Token) format, signed using
|
|
the authorization server's private key.
|
|
|
|
#### Example
|
|
|
|
For this example, the client makes an HTTP request to the following endpoint
|
|
over TLS using a client certificate with the server being configured to allow a
|
|
non-verified issuer during the handshake (i.e., a self-signed client cert is
|
|
okay).
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
GET /v2/token/?service=registry.docker.com&scope=repository:samalba/my-app:push&account=jlhawn HTTP/1.1
|
|
Host: auth.docker.com
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The server first inspects the client certificate to extract the subject key and
|
|
lookup which account it is associated with. The client is now authenticated
|
|
using that account.
|
|
|
|
The server next searches its access control list for the account's access to
|
|
the repository `samalba/my-app` hosted by the service `registry.docker.com`.
|
|
|
|
The server will now construct a JSON Web Token to sign and return. A JSON Web
|
|
Token has 3 main parts:
|
|
|
|
1. Headers
|
|
|
|
The header of a JSON Web Token is a standard JOSE header. The "typ" field
|
|
will be "JWT" and it will also contain the "alg" which identifies the
|
|
signing algorithm used to produce the signature. It will also usually have
|
|
a "kid" field, the ID of the key which was used to sign the token.
|
|
|
|
Here is an example JOSE Header for a JSON Web Token (formatted with
|
|
whitespace for readability):
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{
|
|
"typ": "JWT",
|
|
"alg": "ES256",
|
|
"kid": "PYYO:TEWU:V7JH:26JV:AQTZ:LJC3:SXVJ:XGHA:34F2:2LAQ:ZRMK:Z7Q6"
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
It specifies that this object is going to be a JSON Web token signed using
|
|
the key with the given ID using the Elliptic Curve signature algorithm
|
|
using a SHA256 hash.
|
|
|
|
2. Claim Set
|
|
|
|
The Claim Set is a JSON struct containing these standard registered claim
|
|
name fields:
|
|
|
|
<dl>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>iss</code> (Issuer)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The issuer of the token, typically the fqdn of the authorization
|
|
server.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>sub</code> (Subject)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The subject of the token; the id of the client which requested it.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>aud</code> (Audience)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The intended audience of the token; the id of the service which
|
|
will verify the token to authorize the client/subject.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>exp</code> (Expiration)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The token should only be considered valid up to this specified date
|
|
and time.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>nbf</code> (Not Before)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The token should not be considered valid before this specified date
|
|
and time.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>iat</code> (Issued At)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
Specifies the date and time which the Authorization server
|
|
generated this token.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>jti</code> (JWT ID)
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
A unique identifier for this token. Can be used by the intended
|
|
audience to prevent replays of the token.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
</dl>
|
|
|
|
The Claim Set will also contain a private claim name unique to this
|
|
authorization server specification:
|
|
|
|
<dl>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>access</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
An array of access entry objects with the following fields:
|
|
|
|
<dl>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>type</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The type of resource hosted by the service.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>name</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
The name of the recource of the given type hosted by the
|
|
service.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
<dt>
|
|
<code>actions</code>
|
|
</dt>
|
|
<dd>
|
|
An array of strings which give the actions authorized on
|
|
this resource.
|
|
</dd>
|
|
</dl>
|
|
</dd>
|
|
</dl>
|
|
|
|
Here is an example of such a JWT Claim Set (formatted with whitespace for
|
|
readability):
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{
|
|
"iss": "auth.docker.com",
|
|
"sub": "jlhawn",
|
|
"aud": "registry.docker.com",
|
|
"exp": 1415387315,
|
|
"nbf": 1415387015,
|
|
"iat": 1415387015,
|
|
"jti": "tYJCO1c6cnyy7kAn0c7rKPgbV1H1bFws",
|
|
"access": [
|
|
{
|
|
"type": "repository",
|
|
"name": "samalba/my-app",
|
|
"actions": [
|
|
"push"
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
3. Signature
|
|
|
|
The authorization server will produce a JOSE header and Claim Set with no
|
|
extraneous whitespace, i.e., the JOSE Header from above would be
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{"typ":"JWT","alg":"ES256","kid":"PYYO:TEWU:V7JH:26JV:AQTZ:LJC3:SXVJ:XGHA:34F2:2LAQ:ZRMK:Z7Q6"}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
and the Claim Set from above would be
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{"iss":"auth.docker.com","sub":"jlhawn","aud":"registry.docker.com","exp":1415387315,"nbf":1415387015,"iat":1415387015,"jti":"tYJCO1c6cnyy7kAn0c7rKPgbV1H1bFws","access":[{"type":"repository","name":"samalba/my-app","actions":["push"]}]}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
The utf-8 representation of this JOSE header and Claim Set are then
|
|
url-safe base64 encoded (sans trailing '=' buffer), producing:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IlBZWU86VEVXVTpWN0pIOjI2SlY6QVFUWjpMSkMzOlNYVko6WEdIQTozNEYyOjJMQVE6WlJNSzpaN1E2In0
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
for the JOSE Header and
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
eyJpc3MiOiJhdXRoLmRvY2tlci5jb20iLCJzdWIiOiJqbGhhd24iLCJhdWQiOiJyZWdpc3RyeS5kb2NrZXIuY29tIiwiZXhwIjoxNDE1Mzg3MzE1LCJuYmYiOjE0MTUzODcwMTUsImlhdCI6MTQxNTM4NzAxNSwianRpIjoidFlKQ08xYzZjbnl5N2tBbjBjN3JLUGdiVjFIMWJGd3MiLCJhY2Nlc3MiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJyZXBvc2l0b3J5IiwibmFtZSI6InNhbWFsYmEvbXktYXBwIiwiYWN0aW9ucyI6WyJwdXNoIl19XX0
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
for the Claim Set. These two are concatenated using a '.' character,
|
|
yielding the string:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IlBZWU86VEVXVTpWN0pIOjI2SlY6QVFUWjpMSkMzOlNYVko6WEdIQTozNEYyOjJMQVE6WlJNSzpaN1E2In0.eyJpc3MiOiJhdXRoLmRvY2tlci5jb20iLCJzdWIiOiJqbGhhd24iLCJhdWQiOiJyZWdpc3RyeS5kb2NrZXIuY29tIiwiZXhwIjoxNDE1Mzg3MzE1LCJuYmYiOjE0MTUzODcwMTUsImlhdCI6MTQxNTM4NzAxNSwianRpIjoidFlKQ08xYzZjbnl5N2tBbjBjN3JLUGdiVjFIMWJGd3MiLCJhY2Nlc3MiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJyZXBvc2l0b3J5IiwibmFtZSI6InNhbWFsYmEvbXktYXBwIiwiYWN0aW9ucyI6WyJwdXNoIl19XX0
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This is then used as the payload to a the `ES256` signature algorithm
|
|
specified in the JOSE header and specified fully in [Section 3.4 of the JSON Web Algorithms (JWA)
|
|
draft specification](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-algorithms-38#section-3.4)
|
|
|
|
This example signature will use the following ECDSA key for the server:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
{
|
|
"kty": "EC",
|
|
"crv": "P-256",
|
|
"kid": "PYYO:TEWU:V7JH:26JV:AQTZ:LJC3:SXVJ:XGHA:34F2:2LAQ:ZRMK:Z7Q6",
|
|
"d": "R7OnbfMaD5J2jl7GeE8ESo7CnHSBm_1N2k9IXYFrKJA",
|
|
"x": "m7zUpx3b-zmVE5cymSs64POG9QcyEpJaYCD82-549_Q",
|
|
"y": "dU3biz8sZ_8GPB-odm8Wxz3lNDr1xcAQQPQaOcr1fmc"
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
A resulting signature of the above payload using this key is:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
QhflHPfbd6eVF4lM9bwYpFZIV0PfikbyXuLx959ykRTBpe3CYnzs6YBK8FToVb5R47920PVLrh8zuLzdCr9t3w
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Concatenating all of these together with a `.` character gives the
|
|
resulting JWT:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IlBZWU86VEVXVTpWN0pIOjI2SlY6QVFUWjpMSkMzOlNYVko6WEdIQTozNEYyOjJMQVE6WlJNSzpaN1E2In0.eyJpc3MiOiJhdXRoLmRvY2tlci5jb20iLCJzdWIiOiJqbGhhd24iLCJhdWQiOiJyZWdpc3RyeS5kb2NrZXIuY29tIiwiZXhwIjoxNDE1Mzg3MzE1LCJuYmYiOjE0MTUzODcwMTUsImlhdCI6MTQxNTM4NzAxNSwianRpIjoidFlKQ08xYzZjbnl5N2tBbjBjN3JLUGdiVjFIMWJGd3MiLCJhY2Nlc3MiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJyZXBvc2l0b3J5IiwibmFtZSI6InNhbWFsYmEvbXktYXBwIiwiYWN0aW9ucyI6WyJwdXNoIl19XX0.QhflHPfbd6eVF4lM9bwYpFZIV0PfikbyXuLx959ykRTBpe3CYnzs6YBK8FToVb5R47920PVLrh8zuLzdCr9t3w
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This can now be placed in an HTTP response and returned to the client to use to
|
|
authenticate to the audience service:
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
|
|
Content-Type: application/json
|
|
|
|
{"token": "eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IlBZWU86VEVXVTpWN0pIOjI2SlY6QVFUWjpMSkMzOlNYVko6WEdIQTozNEYyOjJMQVE6WlJNSzpaN1E2In0.eyJpc3MiOiJhdXRoLmRvY2tlci5jb20iLCJzdWIiOiJqbGhhd24iLCJhdWQiOiJyZWdpc3RyeS5kb2NrZXIuY29tIiwiZXhwIjoxNDE1Mzg3MzE1LCJuYmYiOjE0MTUzODcwMTUsImlhdCI6MTQxNTM4NzAxNSwianRpIjoidFlKQ08xYzZjbnl5N2tBbjBjN3JLUGdiVjFIMWJGd3MiLCJhY2Nlc3MiOlt7InR5cGUiOiJyZXBvc2l0b3J5IiwibmFtZSI6InNhbWFsYmEvbXktYXBwIiwiYWN0aW9ucyI6WyJwdXNoIl19XX0.QhflHPfbd6eVF4lM9bwYpFZIV0PfikbyXuLx959ykRTBpe3CYnzs6YBK8FToVb5R47920PVLrh8zuLzdCr9t3w"}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Using the signed token
|
|
|
|
Once the client has a token, it will try the registry request again with the
|
|
token placed in the HTTP `Authorization` header like so:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Authorization: Bearer eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IkJWM0Q6MkFWWjpVQjVaOktJQVA6SU5QTDo1RU42Ok40SjQ6Nk1XTzpEUktFOkJWUUs6M0ZKTDpQT1RMIn0.eyJpc3MiOiJhdXRoLmRvY2tlci5jb20iLCJzdWIiOiJCQ0NZOk9VNlo6UUVKNTpXTjJDOjJBVkM6WTdZRDpBM0xZOjQ1VVc6NE9HRDpLQUxMOkNOSjU6NUlVTCIsImF1ZCI6InJlZ2lzdHJ5LmRvY2tlci5jb20iLCJleHAiOjE0MTUzODczMTUsIm5iZiI6MTQxNTM4NzAxNSwiaWF0IjoxNDE1Mzg3MDE1LCJqdGkiOiJ0WUpDTzFjNmNueXk3a0FuMGM3cktQZ2JWMUgxYkZ3cyIsInNjb3BlIjoiamxoYXduOnJlcG9zaXRvcnk6c2FtYWxiYS9teS1hcHA6cHVzaCxwdWxsIGpsaGF3bjpuYW1lc3BhY2U6c2FtYWxiYTpwdWxsIn0.Y3zZSwaZPqy4y9oRBVRImZyv3m_S9XDHF1tWwN7mL52C_IiA73SJkWVNsvNqpJIn5h7A2F8biv_S2ppQ1lgkbw
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
This is also described in [Section 2.1 of RFC 6750: The OAuth 2.0 Authorization Framework: Bearer Token Usage](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6750#section-2.1)
|
|
|
|
## Verifying the token
|
|
|
|
The registry must now verify the token presented by the user by inspecting the
|
|
claim set within. The registry will:
|
|
|
|
- Ensure that the issuer (`iss` claim) is an authority it trusts.
|
|
- Ensure that the registry identifies as the audience (`aud` claim).
|
|
- Check that the current time is between the `nbf` and `exp` claim times.
|
|
- If enforcing single-use tokens, check that the JWT ID (`jti` claim) value has
|
|
not been seen before.
|
|
- To enforce this, the registry may keep a record of `jti`s it has seen for
|
|
up to the `exp` time of the token to prevent token replays.
|
|
- Check the `access` claim value and use the identified resources and the list
|
|
of actions authorized to determine whether the token grants the required
|
|
level of access for the operation the client is attempting to perform.
|
|
- Verify that the signature of the token is valid.
|
|
|
|
At no point in this process should the registry need to <em>call back</em> to
|
|
the authorization server. If anything, it would only need to update a list of
|
|
trusted public keys for verifying token signatures or use a separate API
|
|
(still to be spec'd) to add/update resource records on the authorization
|
|
server.
|