Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding support of common security cipher module for encryption and decryption of a passkey #17201

Open
wants to merge 23 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
23 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
120 changes: 120 additions & 0 deletions src/sonic-py-common/sonic_py_common/security_cipher.py
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
'''

A common module for handling the encryption and
decryption of the feature passkey. It also takes
care of storying the secure cipher at root
nmoray marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
protected file system

'''

import subprocess
import threading
import syslog
import os
from swsscommon.swsscommon import ConfigDBConnector

class security_cipher:
nmoray marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
_instance = None
_lock = threading.Lock()

def __new__(cls):
with cls._lock:
if cls._instance is None:
cls._instance = super(security_cipher, cls).__new__(cls)
cls._instance._initialized = False
return cls._instance

def __init__(self):
if not self._initialized:
self._file_path = "/etc/cipher_pass"
self._config_db = ConfigDBConnector()
self._config_db.connect()
# Note: Kept 1st index NA intentionally to map it with the cipher_pass file
# contents. The file has a comment at the 1st row / line
self._feature_list = ["NA", "TACPLUS", "RADIUS", "LDAP"]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need a master key per feature? I thought we're using one master key for all features.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess it is better to have different Master keys for different feature. This way, there will not be any inter-dependency between them.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's not complicate things for the user, just follow well established practices (e.g a master key for all features) from the popular NOS if possible, my 2 cents.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@nmoray nmoray Nov 16, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this approach, we can further extend this implementation for other modules too not just TACPLUS, RADIUS and LDAP. Additionally, it is upto the user if he / she needs to use different keys or can use same keys for all.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It will give flexibility to the user, in my opinion.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we go with single key, it will be having huge dependancy in case of changing that key. User needs to change the encrypted passkey in CONFIG_DB for all the features.

Copy link
Collaborator

@venkatmahalingam venkatmahalingam Nov 28, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I disagree, IMO, we should just look at the behavior of other popular NOS that's been there for many years, if required for any SONiC use-case, we can think about providing the flexibility in the future.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this approach, we are already providing the flexibility to the user (why to wait for the future :-)). They can have either same or different keys for different features.

The proprietary NOSes have different architectures and they have implemented the feature which can be fitted into their infrastructure. :-) I guess, it is always better if we can add bit of flexibility into any of the designs.

if not os.path.exists(self._file_path):
with open(self._file_path, 'w') as file:
file.writelines("#Auto generated file for storing the encryption passwords\n")
file.writelines("TACPLUS : \nRADIUS : \nLDAP :\n")
#os.chmod(self._file_path, 0o644)
nmoray marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
self._initialized = True

# Write cipher_pass file
def __write_passwd_file(self, feature_type, passwd):
if feature_type == 'NA':
syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "__write_passwd_file: Invalid feature type: {}".format(feature_type))
return

if feature_type in self._feature_list:
try:
with open(self._file_path, 'r') as file:
lines = file.readlines()
# Update the password for given feature
lines[self._feature_list.index(feature_type)] = feature_type + ' : ' + passwd + '\n'

#os.chmod(self._file_path, 0o777)
with open(self._file_path, 'w') as file:
file.writelines(lines)
nmoray marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
#os.chmod(self._file_path, 0o644)
except FileNotFoundError:
syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "__write_passwd_file: File {} no found".format(self._file_path))
except PermissionError:
syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "__write_passwd_file: Read permission denied: {}".format(self._file_path))

# Read cipher pass file and return the feature specifc
nmoray marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
# password
def __read_passwd_file(self, feature_type):
passwd = None
if feature_type == 'NA':
syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "__read_passwd_file: Invalid feature type: {}".format(feature_type))
return passwd

if feature_type in self._feature_list:
try:
with open(self._file_path, "r") as file:
lines = file.readlines()
for line in lines:
if feature_type in line:
passwd = line.split(' : ')[1]

except FileNotFoundError:
syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "__read_passwd_file: File {} no found".format(self._file_path))
except PermissionError:
syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "__read_passwd_file: Read permission denied: {}".format(self._file_path))

syslog.syslog(syslog.LOG_ERR, "NIKHIL PASSWORD {}".format(passwd))
return passwd

# Encrypt the passkey
def encrypt_passkey(self, feature_type, secret, passwd):
cmd = [ 'openssl', 'enc', '-aes-128-cbc', '-A', '-a', '-salt', '-pbkdf2', '-pass', 'pass:' + passwd ]
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdin=subprocess.PIPE, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE, universal_newlines=True)
outsecret, errs = p.communicate(input=secret)
if not errs:
self.__write_passwd_file(feature_type, passwd)

return outsecret,errs

# Decrypt the passkey
def decrypt_passkey(self, feature_type, secret):
errs = "Passkey Decryption failed"
passwd = self.__read_passwd_file(feature_type)
if passwd is not None:
cmd = "echo " + format(secret) + " | openssl enc -aes-128-cbc -a -d -salt -pbkdf2 -pass pass:" + passwd
proc = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
output, errs = proc.communicate()

if not errs:
output = output.decode('utf-8')

return output, errs

# Check if the encryption is enabled
def is_key_encrypt_enabled(self, table, entry):
key = 'key_encrypt'
data = self._config_db.get_entry(table, entry)
if data:
if key in data:
return data[key]
return False

Loading