fix(controllers): Usage of k8s secret dockerconfigjson#1353
Conversation
348cfaf to
b523e95
Compare
|
| GitGuardian id | GitGuardian status | Secret | Commit | Filename | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | Generic High Entropy Secret | 3bbe3c9 | kubernetes/controller/test/e2e/testdata/docker-config-json/.docker-config-json | View secret |
| - | - | Base64 Generic High Entropy Secret | 3bbe3c9 | kubernetes/controller/test/e2e/testdata/docker-config-json/bootstrap.yaml | View secret |
🛠 Guidelines to remediate hardcoded secrets
- Understand the implications of revoking this secret by investigating where it is used in your code.
- Replace and store your secrets safely. Learn here the best practices.
- Revoke and rotate these secrets.
- 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.
🦉 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.
b9f376c to
a8b9f9e
Compare
a6adaa3 to
4ae6880
Compare
4ae6880 to
177d912
Compare
jakobmoellerdev
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we really need an e2e and integration test? i feel like one of them should be sufficient.
c5ae00e to
4887f3d
Compare
I believe the |
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
b43bbc6 to
761ae02
Compare
Signed-off-by: Frederic Wilhelm <frederic.wilhelm@sap.com>
On-behalf-of: Gergely Brautigam <gergely.brautigam@sap.com> Signed-off-by: Gergely Brautigam <182850+Skarlso@users.noreply.github.com>
On-behalf-of: Gergely Brautigam <gergely.brautigam@sap.com> Signed-off-by: Gergely Brautigam <182850+Skarlso@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Frederic Wilhelm <fre.wilhelm@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Gergely Brautigam <skarlso777@gmail.com>
|
How did this suddenly start to fail? :D |
dockerconfigjson
I was able to reproduce it locally ONCE. I ran >20 test-runs afterwards and they all passed. Another run on the GHA also passes. I suspect that the test fails, if the credential type registration registers the versioned type first and it becomes the default. Then, the expected configuration (unversioned) does not match the returned configuration (versioned in such cases). I have no idea how this could even happen |
What this PR does / why we need it
Instead of adding e2e examples with credentials, I added them as a separate tests because the file-parsing and deciding when which action of the
ocmclishould be run is hell.(For example we need to include an
.ocmconfigto push to the private registry, but must not copy the resource because then the oci-artifact inside the CV would have the "external" URL which flux does not like. IMO this was not maintainable which is why I added them as e2e tests intestdata. It is more redundant code and configs but its easier maintainable)Which issue(s) this PR fixes
Fixes open-component-model/ocm-project#788