[openstack-dev] [api] [Nova] [Ironic] [Magnum] Microversion guideline in API-WG

Sean Dague sean at dague.net
Mon Jun 22 10:52:51 UTC 2015

On 06/22/2015 05:28 AM, John Garbutt wrote:
> On 22 June 2015 at 00:14, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
>> As an aside, do we think that exposing the exact version of a server
>> process is safe from a security perspective?
> During discussions in the Nova API meeting, it was noted that while we
> do expose the exact API version, we are not exposing the git hash of
> the deployed cloud.
> Its certainly something we need to consider when we talk about bumping
> the micro-version for a security fix, but I suspect the need to
> backport is likely to force us to not bump the API version for such
> changes.
> Its certainly a concern that should be noted, in the hope we can get
> some extra eyes on that detail.

First, I don't think this is an issue. Like John said, we aren't
exposing git hash.

Secondly... the API is a programing interface. Hiding the version number
on a programing interface is... kind of crazy. It would be like making
uname -a return ("Probably Linux") instead of anything specific. Or
"probably libc, your guess is as good as mine". I get where people get
freaked out about sharing, but, you can't have an API without sharing
information about what it is and how to use it. The logical follow on
from hiding the API version is we should delete all the API
documentation as well, because someone might use it to do a bad thing.

Thirdly, we're building an endpoint that we expect to be on the
internet. If we think the only security for it is by hiding information
about it, I think we've got to go back to the drawing board about a lot
of things. Yes, it's hard to get that right. But that's kind of the
whole point of the project. :)


Sean Dague

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list