From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <pmg-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
	by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C2761FF15F
	for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:28:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 70C6110AEC;
	Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:28:51 +0100 (CET)
References: <20241111093231.120597-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
 <20241111132057.0ea5b2c2@rosa.proxmox.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.10.8; emacs 29.4
From: Maximiliano Sandoval <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
To: Stoiko Ivanov <s.ivanov@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:20:20 +0100
In-reply-to: <20241111132057.0ea5b2c2@rosa.proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <s8ozflwhdsd.fsf@proxmox.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.154 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
 KAM_NUMSUBJECT 0.5 Subject ends in numbers excluding current years
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pmg-devel] [PATCH pmg-api v3 1/2] api: document that
 fingerprints are a SHA 256
X-BeenThere: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Mail Gateway development discussion
 <pmg-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pmg-devel>, 
 <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pmg-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pmg-devel>, 
 <mailto:pmg-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
Cc: pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pmg-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com
Sender: "pmg-devel" <pmg-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com>


Stoiko Ivanov <s.ivanov@proxmox.com> writes:

> Thanks for the patches!
>
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2024 10:32:30 +0100
> Maximiliano Sandoval <m.sandoval@proxmox.com> wrote:
>
>> We use the description from the standard option 'fingerprint-sha256'.
>> The option itself cannot be used as the regex allows lowercase
>> characters which don't work here.
> It would really help to get a bit more information about what exactly did
> not work, and what you tested to come to that conclusion.

I tested replacing a single character in the fingerprint with a
lowercase character and the web UI stopped working completely.
Refreshing the tab would send me back to a login screen on which it was
not possible to log in.

> As I'm quite in favor of reusing our standard-options where possible
> I gave your v2 a spin to find out what might not work - from a quick
> glance (w/o testing everything possible) - the following diff should cover
> most issues:
>
> ```
> diff --git a/src/PMG/CLI/pmgcm.pm b/src/PMG/CLI/pmgcm.pm
> index 699089e..c55ef92 100644
> --- a/src/PMG/CLI/pmgcm.pm
> +++ b/src/PMG/CLI/pmgcm.pm
> @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method({
>             };
>             if ($param->{fingerprint}) {
>                 $setup->{cached_fingerprints} = {
> -                   $param->{fingerprint} => 1,
> +                   uc($param->{fingerprint}) => 1,
>                 };
>             } else {
>                 # allow manual fingerprint verification
> diff --git a/src/PMG/Cluster.pm b/src/PMG/Cluster.pm
> index 17ba44d..789746f 100644
> --- a/src/PMG/Cluster.pm
> +++ b/src/PMG/Cluster.pm
> @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ sub update_cert_cache {
>
>      foreach my $entry (values %{$cinfo->{ids}}) {
>         my $node = $entry->{name};
> -       my $fp = $entry->{fingerprint};
> +       my $fp = uc($entry->{fingerprint});
>         if ($node && $fp) {
>             $cert_cache_fingerprints->{$fp} = 1;
>             $cert_cache_nodes->{$node} = $fp;
> @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ sub check_cert_fingerprint {
>
>      my $check = sub {
>         for my $expected (keys %$cert_cache_fingerprints) {
> -           return 1 if $fp eq $expected;
> +           return 1 if uc($fp) eq $expected;
>         }
>         return 0;
>      };
> diff --git a/src/PMG/ClusterConfig.pm b/src/PMG/ClusterConfig.pm
> index 491fede..e469ea9 100644
> --- a/src/PMG/ClusterConfig.pm
> +++ b/src/PMG/ClusterConfig.pm
> @@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ sub read_cluster_conf {
>         $names_hash->{$d->{name}} = 1;
>
>         $d->{cid} = $cid;
> +       $d->{fingerprint} = uc($d->{fingerprint});
>         $maxcid = $cid > $maxcid ? $cid : $maxcid;
>         $maxcid = $d->{maxcid} if defined($d->{maxcid}) && $d->{maxcid} > $maxcid;
>         $cinfo->{master} = $d if $d->{type} eq 'master';
>
> ```
>
> I tested:
> * installing this on a cluster-node where I manually changed the
>   fingerprint to lower-case in /etc/pmg/cluster.conf
> * creating a cluster on the cli - but pasting the fingerprint-option in
>   lower-case
> * changing the apicert (`pmgconfig apicert --force 1`), restarting
>   pmgproxy and running `pmgcm update-fingerprints`)

I am not very comfortable adding a new state that might potential break
something that we did not test (or that it might break in the future)
for a feature that does not add anything for the end-user. I think it
makes more sense to simply document the current behavior.

> I also would rather not reuse the description of a standard-option for
> a slightly different copy of that option.

That is sensible, perhaps a different description could be used?


_______________________________________________
pmg-devel mailing list
pmg-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pmg-devel