feat(dir): add ownership claim referrer, search, and CLI (v1) by vivekkrishna · Pull Request #1478 · agntcy/dir

vivekkrishna · 2026-05-09T12:27:00Z

Summary

Introduces single-source-of-truth record ownership via OCI referrers (agntcy.dir.ownership.v1.Claim)
Adds owners DB table as a derived search index synced from OCI referrers
Enforces caller SPIFFE ID == owner_id when authentication is enabled
Exposes dirctl ownership claim command and --owner search filter

Changes

Proto / API

proto/agntcy/dir/ownership/v1/claim.proto: new Claim message (owner_id, claimed_at)
api/ownership/v1/claim.go: MarshalReferrer / UnmarshalReferrer + ReferrerType()
api/core/v1/referrer_types.go: OwnershipClaimReferrerType = "agntcy.dir.ownership.v1.Claim"
proto/agntcy/dir/core/v1/rules.proto: CEL whitelist extended with ownership type
proto/agntcy/dir/search/v1/record_query.proto: RECORD_QUERY_TYPE_OWNER = 17

Server

server/store/oci/types.go: OwnershipClaimArtifactMediaType + OCI type mapping
server/database/gorm/record.go: Owner model, AddOwner, RemoveOwners, ownership JOIN filter
server/database/gorm/gorm.go: Owner table migration
server/types/database.go: OwnershipDatabaseAPI interface
server/types/search.go: Owners []string field + WithOwners() filter option
server/database/utils/utils.go: RECORD_QUERY_TYPE_OWNER → WithOwners()
server/controller/store.go: ownership claim enforcement + immediate DB indexing on push

Reconciler

reconciler/tasks/ownership/: new task that walks OCI referrers and syncs owners table
reconciler/config/config.go: Ownership config field + env var bindings
reconciler/service/service.go: ownership task registration

CLI

cli/cmd/ownership/ownership.go: dirctl ownership claim --record <CID> --owner <id>
cli/cmd/root.go: ownership command registered
cli/cmd/search/filters.go: --owner flag + RECORD_QUERY_TYPE_OWNER query
cli/cmd/daemon/config.go: ownership reconciler defaults (enabled=true, interval=5m)

Tests

tests/e2e/local/13_ownership_search_test.go: 7 e2e tests (all passing) covering exact match, wildcards, combined filters, and negative cases

Test plan

All unit tests pass (go test ./... in server, reconciler, api, cli modules)
Lint clean (task lint)
7 ownership e2e tests pass locally with running daemon
Full e2e suite in CI (requires Docker for DNS validation container)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

codecov · 2026-05-09T12:44:51Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 52.16049% with 155 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
api/ownership/v1/sign.go	45.1%	43 Missing and 19 partials ⚠️
reconciler/tasks/ownership/task.go	38.9%	37 Missing and 7 partials ⚠️
server/controller/store.go	34.8%	9 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
api/ownership/v1/claim.go	61.9%	4 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
cli/cmd/ownership/ownership.go	78.4%	4 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
server/database/gorm/record.go	61.9%	7 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
reconciler/service/service.go	44.4%	2 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
reconciler/tasks/ownership/config.go	50.0%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
server/store/oci/types.go	50.0%	2 Missing ⚠️
server/database/gorm/gorm.go	0.0%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

vivekkrishna · 2026-05-20T20:39:07Z

@ramizpolic Any comments on this?

ramizpolic · 2026-05-20T21:00:14Z

Hey @vivekkrishna, thanks for the PR. It looks good from my end, the only issue is that we are working on simplifying the interfaces and API surface in this PR #1500, and I am not sure which order to take (merge that PR, adjust this, or something else). I think that work will be done soon (end of next week). Can we hold this PR open until then and do a rebase together to merge this PR?

Alternatively, I think you don't even need any code changes for your functionality since you can already push whichever referrer you want and it should work out of box. Code snippet below

dir/server/store/oci/referrers.go

Lines 62 to 75 in 0c58515

    
           // Route based on referrer type 
        
           switch referrer.GetType() { 
        
           case corev1.SignatureReferrerType: 
        
           	// TODO: validate signature 
        
           	return s.pushReferrer(ctx, recordCID, referrer) 
        
           case corev1.PublicKeyReferrerType: 
        
           	// TODO: validate public key 
        
           	return s.pushReferrer(ctx, recordCID, referrer) 
        
           default: 
        
           	// Store as generic OCI referrer 
        
           	return s.pushReferrer(ctx, recordCID, referrer) 
        
           }

The only issue would be that the CLI is not available, but this can be handled through a separate CLI for your needs built with DIR Go SDK. Lets sync tomorrow/when it works for you on Slack and we can decide next steps together.

vivekkrishna · 2026-05-20T21:09:20Z

Sure @ramizpolic , I will sync up over slack.

vivekkrishna · 2026-05-23T19:00:05Z

Hi @ramizpolic . After analysis, merging as-is makes sense for these reasons.

The generic PushReferrer path (referrers.go:72-74) just stores a blob in OCI with no DB indexing — no owners table, no --owner search, and no foundation for manager subtree search. #1478's owners table + eager indexing + reconciler is exactly what makes ownership searchable and is the prerequisite for manager search (#1468).

On the #1500 question: planning to land #1478 on v1 PushReferrer as-is, then rebuild ownership onto the v2 ObjectStore + ObjectReferrer path once #1500 merges — does that sequencing work? Only immediate blocker is Target() added to StoreAPI in #1500 will break #1478's compile, so I'll add that method to the v1 OCI store when rebasing. Happy to hold if you'd rather do it right in v2 from the start — just didn't want to block manager search on #1500's timeline.

ramizpolic · 2026-05-25T22:28:17Z

+	var ownershipClaim *ownershipv1.Claim
+
+	if request.GetType() == corev1.OwnershipClaimReferrerType {
+		claim := &ownershipv1.Claim{}
+		if err := claim.UnmarshalReferrer(&corev1.RecordReferrer{Data: request.GetData()}); err != nil {
+			errMsg := fmt.Sprintf("failed to decode ownership claim: %v", err)
+


this ownership claim is currently unverifiable since the following things can happen:

user has write access to the OCI store (either directly or via sync)

user writes an ownership claim to a non-owned resource through OCI referrers (either directly or through its own OCI that gets synced to a targeted node)

target node indexes ownership through the reconciler

the resource is reported as owned by someone who actually doesnt own it

this behavior enables targeted attacks across the network since the data has 2 access points:

unsafe route through OCI that doesnt get verified in the reconciler

secure route through the controller that does get verified

my concern here is that the ownership claims are not verifiable. we already support verifiable claims through a public key and keyless OIDC signing (dirctl sign) via COSIGN which gets verified and indexed into the database. I am not sure if we currently have a mechanism to search over this data, but it is present and may only need query params to be exposed on the client-side. perhaps @paralta can assist on this question

i think a secure/verifiable way to enable this functionality is to add support for SPIFFE-based signing. this would provide all the things you need, and i would happily merge it. it would also be a super important feature for us, not just for local use-case, but across the (insecure) network.

could you please adjust the implementation according to the notes above and we can merge it right away

Thanks for the input @ramizpolic , addressed with new commit.

Addresses ramizpolic's security comment on PR agntcy#1478. Without signing, any caller with OCI write access could forge ownership claims; the reconciler would index them blindly. Changes: - proto: add signature (bytes) and certificate (bytes) fields to Claim - api/ownership/v1/sign.go: SignClaim, VerifyClaim, IsSigned; supports ECDSA (P256/P384/P521) and RSA; canonical payload SHA-256(owner_id:claimed_at) - cli: --key / --cert flags on ownership claim; identity mismatch caught client-side before any network call - reconciler: TrustedCACertFile config; verifyClaim() gate before db.AddOwner(); unsigned claims accepted with warning in dev mode (no SPIFFE configured) - server/controller: indexOwnershipClaim() helper verifies signed claims before eager db.AddOwner() so tampered claims are rejected at push time - tests: GenerateSpiffeTestCert helper (pure crypto/x509, no SPIRE needed); 14_ownership_signing_test.go (happy path, identity mismatch, idempotent re-push); 5 unit tests covering round-trip, tamper detection, and unsigned-claim rejection

Addresses ramizpolic's security comment on PR agntcy#1478. Without signing, any caller with OCI write access could forge ownership claims; the reconciler would index them blindly. Changes: - proto: add signature (bytes) and certificate (bytes) fields to Claim - api/ownership/v1/sign.go: SignClaim, VerifyClaim, IsSigned; supports ECDSA (P256/P384/P521) and RSA; canonical payload SHA-256(owner_id:claimed_at) - cli: --key / --cert flags on ownership claim; identity mismatch caught client-side before any network call - reconciler: TrustedCACertFile config; verifyClaim() gate before db.AddOwner(); unsigned claims accepted with warning in dev mode (no SPIFFE configured) - server/controller: indexOwnershipClaim() helper verifies signed claims before eager db.AddOwner() so tampered claims are rejected at push time - tests: GenerateSpiffeTestCert helper (pure crypto/x509, no SPIRE needed); 14_ownership_signing_test.go (happy path, identity mismatch, idempotent re-push); 5 unit tests covering round-trip, tamper detection, and unsigned-claim rejection Signed-off-by: Vivek Krishna Choppa <vivekkrishnachoppa@gmail.com>

Introduces a single-source-of-truth ownership model using OCI referrers: - api: add OwnershipClaim proto + MarshalReferrer/UnmarshalReferrer - api/core: add OwnershipClaimReferrerType constant and CEL whitelist entry - server/store/oci: add OwnershipClaimArtifactMediaType mapping - server/database: add owners table (Owner model, AddOwner, RemoveOwners, WithOwners filter) - server/controller: enforce caller SPIFFE ID == owner_id; index claim on push - reconciler: add ownership task to walk referrers and sync owners table - cli: add dirctl ownership claim command and --owner search filter - cli/daemon: register ownership reconciler defaults - tests/e2e: add ownership-based search test suite (7 cases, all passing) Signed-off-by: Vivek Krishna Choppa <vivekkrishnachoppa@gmail.com>

Addresses ramizpolic's security comment on PR agntcy#1478. Without signing, any caller with OCI write access could forge ownership claims; the reconciler would index them blindly. Changes: - proto: add signature (bytes) and certificate (bytes) fields to Claim - api/ownership/v1/sign.go: SignClaim, VerifyClaim, IsSigned; supports ECDSA (P256/P384/P521) and RSA; canonical payload SHA-256(owner_id:claimed_at) - cli: --key / --cert flags on ownership claim; identity mismatch caught client-side before any network call - reconciler: TrustedCACertFile config; verifyClaim() gate before db.AddOwner(); unsigned claims accepted with warning in dev mode (no SPIFFE configured) - server/controller: indexOwnershipClaim() helper verifies signed claims before eager db.AddOwner() so tampered claims are rejected at push time - tests: GenerateSpiffeTestCert helper (pure crypto/x509, no SPIRE needed); 14_ownership_signing_test.go (happy path, identity mismatch, idempotent re-push); 5 unit tests covering round-trip, tamper detection, and unsigned-claim rejection Signed-off-by: Vivek Krishna Choppa <vivekkrishnachoppa@gmail.com>

vivekkrishna · 2026-05-28T21:41:26Z

should we add this 1.5 milestone?

vivekkrishna requested a review from a team as a code owner May 9, 2026 12:27

github-actions Bot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 200-999 lines label May 9, 2026

vivekkrishna force-pushed the feat/ownership-v1 branch from 9cca9e0 to 21fdd72 Compare May 9, 2026 12:33

vivekkrishna force-pushed the feat/ownership-v1 branch from 21fdd72 to 330f7ad Compare May 11, 2026 20:55

vivekkrishna mentioned this pull request May 12, 2026

[Epic] Manager-scoped agent discovery via org hierarchy resolver #1468

Open

vivekkrishna force-pushed the feat/ownership-v1 branch 3 times, most recently from 516e1e8 to f01858e Compare May 14, 2026 04:29

ramizpolic self-requested a review May 20, 2026 21:00

ramizpolic assigned vivekkrishna May 20, 2026

ramizpolic added this to Discovery May 20, 2026

github-project-automation Bot moved this to Backlog in Discovery May 20, 2026

ramizpolic moved this from Backlog to In Progress in Discovery May 20, 2026

ramizpolic added area/dir/server area/cli labels May 20, 2026

ramizpolic reviewed May 25, 2026

View reviewed changes

vivekkrishna force-pushed the feat/ownership-v1 branch from f01858e to 6f92157 Compare May 26, 2026 00:42

github-actions Bot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 1000-1999 lines and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 200-999 lines labels May 26, 2026

vivekkrishna force-pushed the feat/ownership-v1 branch from fca09a8 to e03f587 Compare May 26, 2026 02:14

Vivek Krishna Choppa added 2 commits May 27, 2026 12:38

vivekkrishna force-pushed the feat/ownership-v1 branch from e03f587 to a1d7ba7 Compare May 27, 2026 19:38

ramizpolic added this to the [WIP] DIR v1.5 milestone May 29, 2026

ramizpolic linked an issue May 29, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

[WIP] Support SPIFFE-based record identifiers #1559

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat(dir): add ownership claim referrer, search, and CLI (v1)#1478

feat(dir): add ownership claim referrer, search, and CLI (v1)#1478
vivekkrishna wants to merge 2 commits into
agntcy:mainfrom
vivekkrishna:feat/ownership-v1

vivekkrishna commented May 9, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

ramizpolic commented May 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

ramizpolic May 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Conversation

vivekkrishna commented May 9, 2026

Summary

Changes

Test plan

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented May 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

ramizpolic commented May 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 23, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ramizpolic May 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna May 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

vivekkrishna commented May 28, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

codecov Bot commented May 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ramizpolic commented May 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vivekkrishna commented May 23, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ramizpolic May 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading