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

echo GuSSMParameter values by default #143

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

akash1810
Copy link
Member

What does this change?

The value of GuSSMParameter will be the path into parameter store. This isn't private, so setting noEcho should not be the default.

I observed this whilst applying https://github.com/guardian/deploy-tools-platform/pull/323. The value of LoggingStreamName is defaulted and with noEcho set to true, it caused for an interesting CFN update as had to triple check the redacted value.

It is still possible to set noEcho and have added a test to demonstrate this.

Does this change require changes to existing projects or CDK CLI?

No.

How to test

Tests have been added.

How can we measure success?

Better default behaviour of the GuSSMParameter.

Have we considered potential risks?

n/a

The value of GuSSMParameter will be the path into parameter store. This isn't private, so setting noEcho should not be the default.
@akash1810 akash1810 requested a review from a team January 14, 2021 14:01
@jamie-lynch
Copy link
Contributor

The GuSSMParameter is removed in #141 so this problem goes away. In that PR I updated one place where it was used to set noEcho to true explicitly which maybe can be removed?

@akash1810
Copy link
Member Author

The GuSSMParameter is removed in #141 so this problem goes away. In that PR I updated one place where it was used to set noEcho to true explicitly which maybe can be removed

Ah, good point! Yeah, removing the explicit noEcho would be preferred.

@akash1810 akash1810 closed this Jan 14, 2021
@akash1810 akash1810 deleted the aa-ssm-noecho branch January 14, 2021 14:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants