From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C17831FF13B for ; Wed, 06 May 2026 13:29:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B14FB1DD4A; Wed, 6 May 2026 13:28:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Daniel Herzig To: Shannon Sterz Subject: Re: [PATCH manager] certificate: make sure that any new certificate and key match In-Reply-To: <20260506110452.166057-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> References: <20260506110452.166057-1-s.sterz@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 06 May 2026 13:28:45 +0200 Message-ID: <87pl384w0i.fsf@proxmox.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1778066823115 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.489 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [certhelpers.pm] Message-ID-Hash: 3EBTXKWA3YMDUC2J7LNR4ZFTHNX2FNLW X-Message-ID-Hash: 3EBTXKWA3YMDUC2J7LNR4ZFTHNX2FNLW X-MailFrom: d.herzig@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thanks for this! I just built, installed and tested the package. Works perfectly fine, as described in the commit message. Tested-by: Daniel Herzig Shannon Sterz writes: > previously it was possible to upload and set a key and certificate > combination, that did not match each other. this lead to confusing > errors as pveproxy would seemingly start, but not actually serve any > http connections. in a cluster context this leads to "broken pipe" > errors when connecting to such a misconfigured node. since this is > rather confusing, verify that a key and certificate can actually be > used before setting them as the current certificates by loading them > into a TLS context. > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Sterz > --- > > Notes: > this came up in the enterprise support and caused quite a bit of > confusion. > > PVE/CertHelpers.pm | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++