Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 24, 2020. It is now read-only.

trust: provide InsecureSkipTLSCheck to pubkey manager #3016

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 3, 2016
Merged

trust: provide InsecureSkipTLSCheck to pubkey manager #3016

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 3, 2016

Conversation

0xAX
Copy link
Contributor

@0xAX 0xAX commented Aug 2, 2016

We should be able to pass --insecure-options=tls option to the rkt trust
command. But now we can't because we test insecure tls value not from
global options but from already initialized public key manager in the
metaDiscoverPubKeyLocations():

if m.InsecureSkipTLSCheck {
insecure = insecure | discovery.InsecureTLS
}

This patch adds InsecureSkipTLSCheck to the initialization of a public
key manager structure during rkt trust command execution. So, the
value of the --insecure-option=tls will be matched and used as we
suppose.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 2, 2016

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

We should be able to pass --insecure-options=tls option to the `rkt trust`
command. But now we can't because we test insecure tls value not from
global options but from already initialized public key manager in the
metaDiscoverPubKeyLocations():

if m.InsecureSkipTLSCheck {
        insecure = insecure | discovery.InsecureTLS
}

This patch adds InsecureSkipTLSCheck to the initialization of a public
key manager structure during `rkt trust` command execution. So, the
value of the `--insecure-option=tls` will be matched and used as we
suppose.
@lucab
Copy link
Member

lucab commented Aug 2, 2016

ok to test

@lucab
Copy link
Member

lucab commented Aug 3, 2016

LGTM. Thanks for this patch!

@lucab lucab added this to the v1.12.0 milestone Aug 3, 2016
@lucab lucab merged commit a047af7 into rkt:master Aug 3, 2016
@0xAX 0xAX deleted the provide-skip-tls-opt-for-trust branch August 5, 2016 08:57
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants