feat(frontend): implement OAuth authentication

[Rossil2012]

I hereby agree to the terms of the RisingWave Labs, Inc. Contributor License Agreement.

What's changed and what's your intention?

Refer to #11440.

Support to authenticate with OAuth token acquired from cloud.

The basic workflow can be tested as follows:

# create a new user test with OAuth authentication
psql -h localhost -p 4566 -d dev -U root

# in psql
create user test with oauth (
  jwks_url = 'xxx.com',  // required
  issuer = 'risingwave',  // required
  other_params_should_match = 'xxx',  // optional, will be checked against jwt.claims
);

# password here is actually OAuth token, and would be passed with plaintext
psql -h localhost -p 4566 -d dev -U test

kid and alg are required in the header of JWT, and kid is also required in the JWKs returned by the JWKS server. All params set in user creation (except jwks_url) will be checked in the claims of jwt, any mismatch will deny the login process.

Checklist

• I have written necessary rustdoc comments
• I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
• I have added fuzzing tests or opened an issue to track them. (Optional, recommended for new SQL features Sqlsmith: Sql feature generation #7934).
• My PR contains breaking changes. (If it deprecates some features, please create a tracking issue to remove them in the future).
• All checks passed in ./risedev check (or alias, ./risedev c)
• My PR changes performance-critical code. (Please run macro/micro-benchmarks and show the results.)

• My PR contains critical fixes that are necessary to be merged into the latest release. (Please check out the details)

Documentation

• My PR needs documentation updates. (Please use the Release note section below to summarize the impact on users)

Release note

If this PR includes changes that directly affect users or other significant modifications relevant to the community, kindly draft a release note to provide a concise summary of these changes. Please prioritize highlighting the impact these changes will have on users.

New sql syntax:

create/alter user test with oauth (
  jwks_url = 'xxx.com',  // required
  issuer = 'risingwave',  // required
  other_params_should_match = 'xxx',  // optional, will be checked against jwt.claims
);

Note that key in the options must be SMALL-CASED.

[yezizp2012]

LGTM, let's keep this PR and wait for the progress on the cloud side later.

[github-actions]

This PR has been open for 60 days with no activity. Could you please update the status? Feel free to ping a reviewer if you are waiting for review.

[gitguardian]

⚠️ GitGuardian has uncovered 3 secrets following the scan of your pull request.

Please consider investigating the findings and remediating the incidents. Failure to do so may lead to compromising the associated services or software components.

🔎 Detected hardcoded secrets in your pull request

GitGuardian id	GitGuardian status	Secret	Commit	Filename
9425213	Triggered	Generic Password	169720c	ci/scripts/e2e-source-test.sh	View secret
9425213	Triggered	Generic Password	169720c	ci/scripts/e2e-source-test.sh	View secret
9425213	Triggered	Generic Password	169720c	ci/scripts/regress-test.sh	View secret

🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets

1. Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
2. Replace and store your secrets safely. Learn here the best practices.
3. Revoke and rotate these secrets.
4. If possible, rewrite git history. Rewriting git history is not a trivial act. You might completely break other contributing developers' workflow and you risk accidentally deleting legitimate data.

To avoid such incidents in the future consider

• following these best practices for managing and storing secrets including API keys and other credentials
• install secret detection on pre-commit to catch secret before it leaves your machine and ease remediation.

---

<sup>🦉 GitGuardian detects secrets in your source code to help developers and security teams secure the modern development process. You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized GitGuardian to scan your pull request.

Our GitHub checks need improvements? Share your feedbacks!</sup>

[yezizp2012]

Rest LGTM.

[yezizp2012]

Good Job! Have you tested it with @xuhui-lu ?

[Rossil2012]

Good Job! Have you tested it with @xuhui-lu ?

Not yet. Waiting for @xuhui-lu to provide a test jwks server and jwt.

[yezizp2012]

Hi @Rossil2012 , I resolved all comments and pushed some commits directly in this PR. Please help to verify if on your local setup. Let's merge it and cherry-pick to release 1.7 if it works.

[Rossil2012]

Hi @Rossil2012 , I resolved all comments and pushed some commits directly in this PR. Please help to verify if on your local setup. Let's merge it and cherry-pick to release 1.7 if it works.

Wow, thank you! However, in order to support per-user oauth configuration, @xuhui-lu and I determined to add a new syntax like create user u with oauth (jwks_url = 'xxx', user_id = 'xxx'). This way we can enable a more flexible check on the claims decoded from jwt, and community users can build their own oauth authentication workflow by specifying static config in user creation and dynamically check them in jwt header. I will release the details in the introduction later. The system params will not be used then🤣.

[stdrc]

Hi @Rossil2012 , I resolved all comments and pushed some commits directly in this PR. Please help to verify if on your local setup. Let's merge it and cherry-pick to release 1.7 if it works.

Wow, thank you! However, in order to support per-user oauth configuration, @xuhui-lu and I determined to add a new syntax like create user u with oauth (jwks_url = 'xxx', user_id = 'xxx'). This way we can enable a more flexible check on the claims decoded from jwt, and community users can build their own oauth authentication workflow by specifying static config in user creation and dynamically check them in jwt header. I will release the details in the introduction later. The system params will not be used then🤣.

So IIUC the current implementation is not considered as a stable or final one, right? Is that so urgent that this should be released in 1.7? I would suggest to wait for 1.8 which IIRC will be frozen in recent days.

[Rossil2012]

Hi @Rossil2012 , I resolved all comments and pushed some commits directly in this PR. Please help to verify if on your local setup. Let's merge it and cherry-pick to release 1.7 if it works.

Wow, thank you! However, in order to support per-user oauth configuration, @xuhui-lu and I determined to add a new syntax like create user u with oauth (jwks_url = 'xxx', user_id = 'xxx'). This way we can enable a more flexible check on the claims decoded from jwt, and community users can build their own oauth authentication workflow by specifying static config in user creation and dynamically check them in jwt header. I will release the details in the introduction later. The system params will not be used then🤣.

So IIUC the current implementation is not considered as a stable or final one, right? Is that so urgent that this should be released in 1.7? I would suggest to wait for 1.8 which IIRC will be frozen in recent days.

This feature may be urgent for cloud, cc @xuhui-lu.

[xuhui-lu]

Hi @Rossil2012 , I resolved all comments and pushed some commits directly in this PR. Please help to verify if on your local setup. Let's merge it and cherry-pick to release 1.7 if it works.

Wow, thank you! However, in order to support per-user oauth configuration, @xuhui-lu and I determined to add a new syntax like create user u with oauth (jwks_url = 'xxx', user_id = 'xxx'). This way we can enable a more flexible check on the claims decoded from jwt, and community users can build their own oauth authentication workflow by specifying static config in user creation and dynamically check them in jwt header. I will release the details in the introduction later. The system params will not be used then🤣.

So IIUC the current implementation is not considered as a stable or final one, right? Is that so urgent that this should be released in 1.7? I would suggest to wait for 1.8 which IIRC will be frozen in recent days.

This is related to a page revamp recently proposed by yingjun. We need this feature to remove the password for accessing cloud web console.

[stdrc]

Approve on behalf of Cargo-lock