witty-butcher-82399
12/16/2022, 10:51 AM• Ability to define Metadata Policies against multiple reosurces scoped to particular “Containers” (e.g. A “schema”, “database”, or “collection”)Just going higher in the hierarchy up to the platform instance level. In the current status, I was thinking on solving this with
resource_urn criteria https://datahubproject.io/docs/authorization/policies#resources
Does that criteria support other operators different from EQUALS such as starts with, contains or even regexp? Definitely in the UI this is not possible, is it possible via policy as code?
Second question is about applying to owners.
Whether this policy should be apply to owners of the Metadata asset. If true, those who are marked as owners of a Metadata Asset, either directly or indirectly via a Group, will have the selected privileges.Can this be restricted to some ownership in particular? Thanks
bulky-soccer-26729
12/16/2022, 5:24 PMEQUALS as you pointed out (so it's not just the frontend with this limitation). as it stands right now, the best way to limit create a policy for a subset of resources not specific to a singular entity type, would be to group data assets into a Domain. However, being able to set policies based on higher level containers obviously makes a lot of sense, same thing with at the data platform instance level!bulky-soccer-26729
12/16/2022, 5:24 PMwitty-butcher-82399
12/17/2022, 4:20 AMbeing able to set policies based on higher level containers obviously makes a lot of sense, same thing with at the data platform instance level
and for your second question, do you mean a specific type of ownership? or specific individuals?Yes, specific type of ownership. At this moment we track two types of owners in the Data Catalogue for datasets: • DATAOWNER… group actually and legally owning the data (there can be multiple in a dataset) • TECHNICAL_OWNER… the group that owns the dataset resource (1 for a dataset) They can and are usually different We would like to restrict dataset metadata updates (doc, schema, etc) only to the TECHNICAL_OWNER (the resource/dataset owner)
bulky-soccer-26729
12/19/2022, 2:45 PMbulky-soccer-26729
12/19/2022, 2:46 PMwitty-butcher-82399
12/19/2022, 3:12 PMDATAOWNER being included.
Note we are extensively using (or planning 😅) these ownership types for managing other use cases… beyond the UI (eg access management or authorization policies as pointed out above).
Removing those ownership types would have big impact on our side 😢
If you are planning updates on OwnershipType, the values could be:
• either configurable
• or free text