Skip to content
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

RFC - Consolidate use of insecure endpoints across controllers #3076

Closed
pjbgf opened this issue Sep 6, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3081
Closed

RFC - Consolidate use of insecure endpoints across controllers #3076

pjbgf opened this issue Sep 6, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #3081
Assignees
Labels
area/rfc Feature request proposals in the RFC format
Milestone

Comments

@pjbgf
Copy link
Member

pjbgf commented Sep 6, 2022

Across Flux controllers the use of non-TLS based connections is not consistent.

Controllers that deals only with http and https schemes have no way to block use of the http scheme at controller-level.
Some Flux objects provide an .Spec.Insecure field to enable the use of non-TLS based endpoints, but they don't clearly notify users when the option is not supported (e.g. Azure/GCP Buckets).

A new RFC should be created to establish:

  • Controller-level ways to block the use of HTTP endpoints. When enabled, the flag would not allow the use of the non-TLS based connections across all controller-level objects.
  • Consistent way to support insecure endpoints and to notify when they are not supported (or it has been blocked at controller level).
  • Naming conventions covering flags and object fields.

Related Implementations:

@pjbgf pjbgf added the area/rfc Feature request proposals in the RFC format label Sep 6, 2022
@pjbgf pjbgf added this to the GA milestone Sep 6, 2022
@aryan9600 aryan9600 self-assigned this Sep 6, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/rfc Feature request proposals in the RFC format
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants