Topic on Talk:Gerrit/Privilege policy

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Clarify reference to "Gerrit Administrators"

14
DKinzler (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The policy currently refers to "Gerrit Administrators" as being responsible or empowered to perform certain actions by this policy. It would however be more useful to associate these powers and responsibilities with gerrit permissions rather than a specific group, allowing the granularity of groups and permissions on gerrit to be improved as discussed on phab:T219012#5057232.

I propose to replace all references to "Gerrit Administrators" with "people with the necessary permissions on gerrit", (or an equivalent but less clunky phrase).

Hashar (talkcontribs)

On one side there is the administration of the Gerrit software itself. That is the Administrators built-in group in Gerrit which is https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/1,members This is the equivalent of having read/write access everywhere (disk or database).

On the other hand, the Gerrit Managers group https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/119,members is for administration of policy / access lists / repositories etc. It is less privileged than the administrators of the software itself, but is still a very large set of permissions. The group was originally named Project and Group Managers but got renamed to Gerrit Managers in Feb 2018 by https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/plugins/gitiles/All-Projects/+/10107cf5056eb6ef3903f49d59cd27387831c5b5%5E%21/#F0 It is semantically broader and might be confusing :D

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I think changing it to "Gerrit Managers" would be the most reasonable change.

DKinzler (WMF) (talkcontribs)

> I think changing it to "Gerrit Managers" would be the most reasonable change.

It sounds reasonable, but in T219012 there is talk of creating a mediawiki-administrators. And further groups may be created in the future, for other repos, or with different rights.

This is why I want to avoid any group names in the policy. The policy should apply to whoever has the respective rights.


Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Then call it "the 'Gerrit Managers' group of individuals, or whatever it's called this week". Let them bike-shed in peace.

Nikerabbit (talkcontribs)
Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)
Tim Starling (talkcontribs)

Gerrit Managers can change group membership only for groups they own, which is only 201 groups out of 1630. I volunteered to update the policy to say that Gerrit Managers can change groups, but I'm not going to do that when it's not true. 201 is suspiciously close to a round number, is it possible that someone tried to edit all the groups to be owned by Gerrit Managers but it failed due to a batch size limit? If I do the following query on the Gerrit database:

select group_id,name,owner_group_uuid='93b1e277b72d0e0a883afbc0a87948dd6dd0d7b7' as managed from account_groups where name like 'extension-%';

I get 1022 such extension-specific groups, of which 118 are owned by Gerrit Manager. The groups owned by Gerrit Manager are not contiguous when sorted by ID, UUID or name.

DKinzler (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Uh, that does sound odd...

I think the policy should just say "whoever has the permission to do it".

Tim Starling (talkcontribs)

How about we make all groups be owned by Gerrit Manager? Then we will actually be able to explain who has the ability to do this.

DKinzler (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I thought the idea was that no single group should have all the power, for security reasons. Wasn't that why the Administrators group was changed, after we had vandalism on Gerrit?

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

No. The built-in Administrators group has powers that shouldn't generally be wielded, and which we can't remove or restrict (but would almost never need to use). The idea was to reduce the number of accounts with world-ending powers; it wasn't related to the kinds of actions this policy covers.

DKinzler (WMF) (talkcontribs)

So Gerrit Manager should indeed own all groups?

MarcoAurelio (talkcontribs)

However Gerrit Managers don't have the ability to add people to the MediaWiki group. If you go with Gerrit Managers, we should also empower them to add/remove people from there or leave things as they are and let the LDAP group gerritadmin people to add people to the mediawiki group as it happens now AIUI.

Reply to "Clarify reference to "Gerrit Administrators""