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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
First pass at JWT auto-deletion flag #11969
First pass at JWT auto-deletion flag #11969
Changes from 1 commit
4572a9f
bf94d21
e2def7f
033c1cf
c713a6b
d07e975
174eaf8
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Can we flip this around and have it be
keep_after_reading
or something along those lines? This way the default value is also the zero value (false
).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 thought about that but I thought it more prudent to retain the current default behavior and opt-out if needed. I'd assume that in most cases, the default behavior is more appropriate. This change is mostly to allow for using Kubernetes bound service account tokens with JWT auth. In this use case, Kubernetes automatically rotates the JWT based on a configurable TTL.
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.
keep_after_reading
with it being defaultedfalse
should still retain the current behavior though. Note that we're flipping the naming and also the default so keeping the file would still be an opt-in. We'd only not delete the file if this gets set totrue
explicitly.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.
Ah ok, I see what you mean. I was following the same model that the AppRole auto-auth was using but I can change this around if it makes more sense.
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 think
keep_jwt_after_reading
works, but I am not convinced that it needs to be this verbose. I think any of :skip_jwt_cleanup
,no_jwt_cleanup
,preseve_jwt
could probably work well.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 actually like
remove_jwt_after_reading
for its consistency with AppRole's option: https://www.vaultproject.io/docs/agent/autoauth/methods/approle#remove_secret_id_file_after_readingIMO the bar to break from this pattern needs to be higher than making it terser. If it wasn't for the prior art, I would 100% agree with both the flip + naming comments above, but they're minor nits and they're secondary to preventing confusion for consumers.