Updates:
Status: Fixed
Labels: -Milestone-Release2.14 -Priority-Critical Milestone-Release2.16
Comment #9 on issue 602 by [email protected]: Add support for passing
secret parameters to instances at creation time
https://code.google.com/p/ganeti/issues/detail?id=602
Fixed with:
commit 74c46ddfa3b508957e96a241637799589a0eba93
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Jun 8 13:31:25 2015 +0200
Use QueuedJob instead of JobId in Exec.forkJobProcess
This is necessary to access secret parameters.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit 54288111fbf974abf3cd2117e37fa9b224e669a3
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Jun 15 13:32:12 2015 +0200
Transmit secret parameters separately
Pass secret parameters in the last step of forking a job process and
re-inject them into the job description on the forked job process.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit 4aee175c665a90654bcbcb9683a1d73e64c0bf83
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Jun 15 14:01:05 2015 +0200
New type Secret to wrap secret parameters
This Secret type works analogously to the Private type, but has a
different showJSON function to prevent secret parameters from showing up
in job files.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit 42d4edb66053027713c7ade91e1ba3608eefbd07
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Mon Jun 8 13:31:49 2015 +0200
Test arbitrary JSON objects with secret parameters
Reflect the representation of secret parameters as "<redacted>" inside
JSON objects for tests.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit 945fdda64ddc9fc4c2df8666a27e51516770efd3
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jun 26 09:48:48 2015 +0200
Set process id before secret parameter injection
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit 5b36e6e4aad45ea99fe68df42aa08925ea377154
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jun 26 09:49:34 2015 +0200
Get rid of unnecessary check
As RestorePrivateValueWrapping() can also handle None, we do not have
to check here.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit b45eaa0bcf4c9dc8aba7291b2f6f087cdf2063dd
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jun 19 14:56:49 2015 +0200
Fail if secret parameters are missing
Raise an OpPrereqError if secret parameters are expected, but missing.
Job retries result in this error.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
commit 9ee0e907a75ce88674d9183bf256359fc7bed19a
Author: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Date: Fri Jun 26 19:04:45 2015 +0200
Test _CheckSecretParameters
Test if OpPrereqError is raised only for redacted values.
Signed-off-by: Lisa Velden <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Hrvoje Ribicic <[email protected]>
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings
