-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
Handle missing secret/secret key for custom certificates #12274
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Draft
tinaselenge
wants to merge
1
commit into
strimzi:main
Choose a base branch
from
tinaselenge:missing-secrets
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@scholzj can I please clarify something here
I was going to make this method public and then use it for extracting CertAndKey from the secret, but realised that it returns it with secret data values that are not decoded (stays encoded in base64). Then the method that calls this method
authTlsHash(), encodes the values again, meaning that certificates and keys end up encoded in base64 twice before calculating the hash for it. I'm not sure if that makes sense or was intentional so wonder if we should decode the extracted values before constructing CertAndKey object to return, just like I did in the new method below. In that case we wouldn't need 2 separate methods for the purpose.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do not think there is any intention of having the hash calculated from data that are twice encoded to Base64 (that said, doing the base64 encoding twice is wasteful, but it should still produce a stable hash, so it should not really cause major issues).
But I think that if you can do it easily, you can definitely remove it. I guess this was either done by mistake or because some of the values being fed there are decoded and some are encoded.
I do not remember the details of how the CertAndKey is used, so not 100% sure if it is better to keep the values encoded or decoded inside it. Normally, the base64 encoding matters for us only when interacting with Kubernetes Secrets. But the certificates themself should be anyway strings even without the base64 encoding.