Resource Access Management

Testkube provides a flexible access-control mechanism to help you enforce how members of an Organization have access to Environments and their Resources (Workflows, Workflow Templates, Triggers and Webhooks).

Organization Members and Teams

There are four roles for organization members - Read More. For the sake of this document:

• Owner / Admin - Always have access to all resources in all environments.
• Member - Resource access is controlled at the Environment and Resource Group level.
• Biller - No Resource access.

To furthermore simplify access management for a group of members, Testkube has the concept of Teams, which provides convenient grouping of members. Whenever you can specify a Member for access control in Testkube, you can also specify a Team.

There are currently two "levels" of providing access to Testkube Resources:

1. Environment Access
2. Resource Groups

Environment Access

To have access to resources in a Testkube Environment, organization Members and Teams must be added to an Environment with a specific role - Read More. The given role applies to all Resources in that Environment.

If a member has access to an Environment via multiple Teams and/or as a direct Member, Testkube will enforce the most permissive role for a given Resource (unless that Resource is in a Resource Group - see below).

note

For example, if Organization Member A has the write Role in Env B, but is also a member of Team C which has the read role in that Environment, Testkube will enforce the write role as it is the more permissive of the two roles.

Resource Group Access

As the number of Resources and Environments grows, it can become desirable to limit which Resources specific Members can work with across your Environments, both from a security and usability perspective. Resource Groups solve for this by allowing you to group Resources across Environments and assign Members and Teams to them with a specific Role.

Similarly as for Environments, if an Organization Member has access to a Resource Group via multiple Teams and/or as a direct Member, Testkube will enforce the most permissive role for a given Resource.

note

For example, you might have defined a number of Workflows for testing your frontend application, but only want certain Organization Members to be able to work with these. In this case you could

• Create an "FE Testers" Team under your Organization and add the corresponding Members to it.
• Create an "FE Tests" Resource Group and assign all your frontend Workflows to that Resource Group. These could be spread across multiple Environments, for example "Staging" and "Production".
• Finally, add the "FE Testers" Team to the "FE Tests" Resource Group with the write role, which would allow them to manage and run all your FE Workflows. Members not in this Team will no longer have access to the Workflows in your "FE Tests" Resource Group when working with the Testkube Dashboard or CLI.

As mentioned above, Resource Groups work "on top" of Environment Access - read on!

The Intersection of Environment and Resource Access

As mentioned above, for a Member to have access to a Resource in an Environment, they always need to have a corresponding access role in that Environment. Therefore, for the above Resource Group example to work, the Members of the "FE Testers" team also need to have a role in the Environments that contain "FE Tests" Resources. When resolving the final permission, Testkube will enforce the less permissive of the Environment and Resource Group roles.

This might be confusing, let's play it out:

• If the "FE Testers" team has the read role in an Environment containing FE Tests, that will be the preceding role since it is less permissive.
• If the "FE Testers" team has the admin role in another Environment containing FE Tests, the preceding role will be write since that is role given for the Resource Group, allowing them to work with the FE Tests Resources as specified by the Resource Group.

The reason for the less permissive role taking precedence is to allow you to ensure/enforce Resource access at the Environment level for critical Environments (for example Production), vs individual Resource Groups providing a "back door" into an Environment for unintended access.

Recommendations

If you don't need fine-grained access control to your Resources you can ignore Resource Groups and work with permissions at the Environment level. Once the need arises for more fine-grained permissions arises, we recommend to start by:

• Giving all Members that work within an Environment the write role in that Environment, either directly or via a Team.
• Create Resource Groups for the groups of Resources that you need and add the corresponding Resources to them.
• Assign corresponding Members to these Resource Groups with the desired role.

The end result will be that

• Only Members of your Resource Groups will be able to see and work with the corresponding Resources.
• You can temporarily "lock down" an Environment by changing the Environment-level role to one with lower permissions (or by removing the corresponding Members altogether).