Custom Roles
Ultimate customers can create custom roles and define those roles by assigning specific abilities.
For example, a user could create an “Engineer” role with read code
and admin merge requests
abilities, but without abilities like admin issues
.
In this context, the terms “permission” and “ability” are often used interchangeably.
- “Ability” is an action a user can do. These map to Declarative Policy abilities and live in Policy classes in
ee/app/policies/*
. - “Permission” is how we refer to an ability in user-facing documentation. The documentation of permissions is manually generated so there is not necessarily a 1:1 mapping of the permissions listed in documentation and the abilities defined in Policy classes.
Custom roles vs static roles
In GitLab 15.9 and earlier, GitLab only had static roles as a permission system. In this system, there are a few predefined roles that are statically assigned to certain abilities. These static roles are not customizable by customers.
With custom roles, the customers can decide which abilities they want to assign to certain user groups. For example:
- In the static role system, reading of vulnerabilities is limited to a Developer role.
- In the custom role system, a customer can assign this ability to a new custom role based on any static role.
Like static roles, custom roles are inherited within a group hierarchy. If a user has custom role for a group, that user will also have a custom role for any projects or subgroups within the group.
Technical overview
- Individual custom roles are stored in the
member_roles
table (MemberRole
model). - A
member_roles
record is associated with top-level groups (not subgroups) via thenamespace_id
foreign key. - A Group or project membership (
members
record) is associated with a custom role via themember_role_id
foreign key. - A Group or project membership can be associated with any custom role that is defined on the root-level group of the group or project.
- The
member_roles
table includes individual permissions and abase_access_level
value. - The
base_access_level
must be a valid access level. Thebase_access_level
determines which abilities are included in the custom role. For example, if thebase_access_level
is10
, the custom role will include any abilities that a static Guest role would receive, plus any additional abilities that are enabled by themember_roles
record by setting an attribute, such asread_code
, to true. - A custom role can enable additional abilities for a
base_access_level
but it cannot disable a permission. As a result, custom roles are “additive only”. The rationale for this choice is in this comment. - For now, custom role abilities are supported only at project level. There is an issue to add support for custom group abilities.
How to implement a new ability for custom roles
Usually 2-3 merge requests should be created for a new ability. The rough guidance is following:
- Pick a feature you want to add abilities to custom roles.
- Refactor & consolidate abilities for the feature (1-2 merge requests depending on the feature complexity)
- Implement a new ability (1 merge request)
Refactoring abilities
Finding existing abilities checks
Abilities are often checked in multiple locations for a single endpoint or web request. Therefore, it can be difficult to find the list of authorization checks that are run for a given endpoint.
To assist with this, you can locally set GITLAB_DEBUG_POLICIES=true
.
This outputs information about which abilities are checked in the requests made in any specs that you run. The output also includes the line of code where the authorization check was made. Caller information is especially helpful in cases where there is metaprogramming used because those cases are difficult to find by grepping for ability name strings.
For example:
# example spec run
GITLAB_DEBUG_POLICIES=true bundle exec rspec spec/controllers/groups_controller_spec.rb:162
# permissions debug output when spec is run; if multiple policy checks are run they will all be in the debug output.
POLICY CHECK DEBUG -> policy: GlobalPolicy, ability: create_group, called_from: ["/gitlab/app/controllers/application_controller.rb:245:in `can?'", "/gitlab/app/controllers/groups_controller.rb:255:in `authorize_create_group!'"]
Use this setting to learn more about authorization checks while refactoring. You should not keep this setting enabled for any specs on the default branch.
Understanding logic for individual abilities
References to an ability may appear in a DeclarativePolicy
class many times
and depend on conditions and rules which reference other abilities. As a result,
it can be challenging to know exactly which conditions apply to a particular
ability.
DeclarativePolicy
provides a ability_map
for each policy class, which
pulls all rules for an ability into an array.
For example:
> GroupPolicy.ability_map.map.select { |k,v| k == :read_group_member }
=> {:read_group_member=>[[:enable, #<Rule can?(:read_group)>], [:prevent, #<Rule ~can_read_group_member>]]}
> GroupPolicy.ability_map.map.select { |k,v| k == :read_group }
=> {:read_group=>
[[:enable, #<Rule public_group>],
[:enable, #<Rule logged_in_viewable>],
[:enable, #<Rule guest>],
[:enable, #<Rule admin>],
[:enable, #<Rule has_projects>],
[:enable, #<Rule read_package_registry_deploy_token>],
[:enable, #<Rule write_package_registry_deploy_token>],
[:prevent, #<Rule all?(~public_group, ~admin, user_banned_from_group)>],
[:enable, #<Rule auditor>],
[:prevent, #<Rule needs_new_sso_session>],
[:prevent, #<Rule all?(ip_enforcement_prevents_access, ~owner, ~auditor)>]]}
DeclarativePolicy
also provides a debug
method that can be used to
understand the logic tree for a specific object and actor. The output is similar
to the list of rules from ability_map
. But, DeclarativePolicy
stops
evaluating rules after you prevent
an ability, so it is possible that
not all conditions are called.
Example:
policy = GroupPolicy.new(User.last, Group.last)
policy.debug(:read_group)
- [0] enable when public_group ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [0] enable when logged_in_viewable ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [0] enable when admin ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [0] enable when auditor ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [14] prevent when all?(~public_group, ~admin, user_banned_from_group) ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [14] prevent when needs_new_sso_session ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [16] enable when guest ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [16] enable when has_projects ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [16] enable when read_package_registry_deploy_token ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
- [16] enable when write_package_registry_deploy_token ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
[21] prevent when all?(ip_enforcement_prevents_access, ~owner, ~auditor) ((@custom_guest_user1 : Group/139))
=> #<DeclarativePolicy::Runner::State:0x000000015c665050
@called_conditions=
#<Set: {
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/public_group/Group:139",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/logged_in_viewable/User:83,Group:139",
"/dp/condition/BasePolicy/admin/User:83",
"/dp/condition/BasePolicy/auditor/User:83",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/user_banned_from_group/User:83,Group:139",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/needs_new_sso_session/User:83,Group:139",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/guest/User:83,Group:139",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/has_projects/User:83,Group:139",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/read_package_registry_deploy_token/User:83,Group:139",
"/dp/condition/GroupPolicy/write_package_registry_deploy_token/User:83,Group:139"}>,
@enabled=false,
@prevented=true>
Abilities consolidation
Every feature added to custom roles should have minimal abilities. For most features, having read_*
and admin_*
should be enough. You should consolidate all:
- View-related abilities under
read_*
. For example, viewing a list or detail. - Object updates under
admin_*
. For example, updating an object, adding assignees or closing it that object. Usually, a role that enablesadmin_
has to have alsoread_
abilities enabled. This is defined inrequirement
option in theALL_CUSTOMIZABLE_PERMISSIONS
hash onMemberRole
model.
There might be features that require additional abilities but try to minimalize those. You can always ask members of the Authentication and Authorization group for their opinion or help.
This is also where your work should begin. Take all the abilities for the feature you work on, and consolidate those abilities into read_
, admin_
, or additional abilities if necessary.
Many abilities in the GroupPolicy
and ProjectPolicy
classes have many
redundant policies. There is an epic for consolidating these Policy classes.
If you encounter similar permissions in these classes, consider refactoring so
that they have the same name.
For example, you see in GroupPolicy
that there is an ability called
read_group_security_dashboard
and in ProjectPolicy
has an ability called
read_project_security_dashboard
. You’d like to make both customizable. Rather
than adding a row to the member_roles
table for each ability, consider
renaming them to read_security_dashboard
and adding read_security_dashboard
to the member_roles
table. This is more expected because it means that
enabling read_security_dashboard
on the parent group will enable the custom
For example, GroupPolicy
has an ability called read_group_security_dashboard
and ProjectPolicy
has an ability
called read_project_security_dashboard
. If you would like to make both customizable, rather than adding a row to the
member_roles
table for each ability, consider renaming them to read_security_dashboard
and adding
read_security_dashboard
to the member_roles
table. This convention means that enabling read_security_dashboard
on
the parent group will allow the custom role to access the group security dashboard and the project security dashboard
for each project in that group. Enabling the same permission on a specific project will allow access to that projects’
security dashboard.
Implement a new ability
To add a new ability to a custom role:
- Add a new column to
member_roles
table, for example in this change in merge request 114734. -
Add the ability to the
MemberRole
model,ALL_CUSTOMIZABLE_PERMISSIONS
hash, for example in this change in merge request 121534. There are following possible keys in theALL_CUSTOMIZABLE_PERMISSIONS
hash:-
description
- description of the ability. -
minimal_level
- minimal level a user has to have in order to be able to be assigned to the ability. -
requirement
- required ability for the ability defined in the hash, in case the requirement isfalse
, the ability can not betrue
.
-
- Add the ability to the respective Policy for example in this change in merge request 114734.
- Update the specs.
Examples of merge requests adding new abilities to custom roles:
- Read code
- Read vulnerability
-
Admin vulnerability - this is the newest MR implementing a new custom role ability. Some changes from the previous MRs are not neccessary anymore (eg. change of the Preloader query or adding a method to
User
model).
You should make sure a new custom roles ability is under a feature flag.
Consuming seats
If a new user with a role Guest
is added to a member role that includes enablement of an ability that is not in the CUSTOMIZABLE_PERMISSIONS_EXEMPT_FROM_CONSUMING_SEAT
array, a seat is consumed. We simply want to make sure we are charging Ultimate customers for guest users, who have “elevated” abilities. This only applies to billable users on SaaS (billable users that are counted towards namespace subscription). More details about this topic can be found in this issue.