Add pkcs12 password feature

[arsenalzp]

This PR is related to the issue #199
It add PKCS12 arbitrary password feature which allows to set a password for PKCS12 bundle as well as don't remove password-less PKCS12 feature.

[jetstack-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign munnerz for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[jetstack-bot]

Hi @arsenalzp. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a cert-manager member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[erikgb]

@arsenalzp This looks like a good start! I have added some comments after my first review pass. Some of them are just suggestions - so feel free to disagree. But please explain why. 😉

/ok-to-test

[arsenalzp]

Hello,
Your remarks were fixed.
Could you please be so kind to review PR again?

[inteon]

Why are these function signatures being changed?

[arsenalzp]

Hello,
Thank you for a review.
jksEncoder and pkcs12Encoder structures bring all necessary information in corresponding properties:

type encoderData struct {
	storePasswd string
	bundleData  string
}

type pkcs12Encoder struct {
	encoderData
}

type jksEncoder struct {
	encoderData
}

In the future it might be reasonable to rewrite functions like populateAdditionalFormatData to either accept encoder interface and based on the casting result invoke corresponding encode() method or use generics, something like that.

[erikgb]

I also don't think you need to change the signature of this function. That makes a struct instance locked to the bundle data. Why do you need to change it?

[arsenalzp]

I guess it makes code more clear and avoid of copying bundle data between function/method.
The bundle data is tightly coupled to its encoder; imagine you would like to add decode(), transform() methods in the future, then it leads that the bundle data should be returned from one encoder method and immediately consumed by another one.
Let's look at how is the bundle data was being used before: put to populate function just only to be put to corresponding encoder's method again.

[erikgb]

That's pretty common in decorators. When will you use function parameters with your view on this?

[arsenalzp]

I agree with you, but at this moment encoder structure consists of 2 fields: password one and data one, what if we need more parameters for encoder, more methods. Ephemeral example - push bundle data into some destination, then encode, so that data should be put as argument twice: to some push(data) as well as to encode(data) functions.
My proposal looks pretty good, we operate by encoder structure, it might be pushed anywhere, with all necessary parameters. populateAdditionalFormatData function accept encoder structure, then within that function we can work the structure we want by any way, everything what we need is already inside that structure.

[arsenalzp]

Dear colleagues, if you insist to use bundle data as argument to encode method, I will rewrite, of course.

[erikgb]

I think these docs are a bit misleading. The default should be "" (empty string) creating a password-less PKC12 truststore.

[arsenalzp]

I agree, this line of code will be changed

[erikgb]

I also don't think you need to change the signature of this function. That makes a struct instance locked to the bundle data. Why do you need to change it?

[arsenalzp]

#229 (comment)

I guess it makes code more clear and avoid of copying bundle data between function/method.
The bundle data is tightly coupled to its encoder; imagine you would like to add decode(), transform() methods in the future, then it leads that the bundle data should be returned from one encoder method and immediately consumed by another one.

[arsenalzp]

Hello colleagues,
Sorry that I'm disturbing you again.
Any decision regarding this PR? Should I change/fix something?

[erikgb]

Should I change/fix something?

Fields or function params is not a blocker for me. I prefer function params, but. Maybe you can fix (and close) the other open discussions? So we are left with just that point to land?

[SgtCoDFish]

This is a drive-by comment and I don't have time to fully review but I think I'm negative on adding this as a command-line flag.

This maps neatly to being added in the resource, which is where I'd expect to be able to set it:

{
  "apiVersion": "trust.cert-manager.io/v1alpha1",
  "kind": "Bundle",
  "metadata": {
    "name": "testing"
  },
  "spec": {
    "sources": [
      {
        "useDefaultCAs": true
      }
    ],
    "target": {
      "additionalFormats": {
        "jks": {
          "key": "my-bundle.jks",
          "password": "super_secret",
        }
      },
      "configMap": {
        "key": "mybundle.pem"
      }
    }
  }
}

Putting myself in the shoes of a user, I'd be familar with the concept that each JKS file can have a different password. I'd expect trust-manager to work the same way as that.

Obviously today we have one global setting for the password, but that's just because the JKS files need some password, not because the setting should be global to all bundles.

I can't really see a reason for this to be a CLI flag.

[arsenalzp]

This is a drive-by comment and I don't have time to fully review but I think I'm negative on adding this as a command-line flag.

This maps neatly to being added in the resource, which is where I'd expect to be able to set it:

{
  "apiVersion": "trust.cert-manager.io/v1alpha1",
  "kind": "Bundle",
  "metadata": {
    "name": "testing"
  },
  "spec": {
    "sources": [
      {
        "useDefaultCAs": true
      }
    ],
    "target": {
      "additionalFormats": {
        "jks": {
          "key": "my-bundle.jks",
          "password": "super_secret",
        }
      },
      "configMap": {
        "key": "mybundle.pem"
      }
    }
  }
}

Putting myself in the shoes of a user, I'd be familar with the concept that each JKS file can have a different password. I'd expect trust-manager to work the same way as that.

Obviously today we have one global setting for the password, but that's just because the JKS files need some password, not because the setting should be global to all bundles.

I can't really see a reason for this to be a CLI flag.

Hello,
It was proposed to do it globally for entire cluster.
However, if someone has different point of view, let's discuss this topic; it is no so hard to rewrite this solution.
In case we accept your point of view, I would move password parameter upper in the Bundle resource, because pksc12 and jks are two formats of the same bundle, I don't expect customer wants to have different password for each format of the same bundle.

[arsenalzp]

Another PR #233 related to @SgtCoDFish was submitted.

[jetstack-bot]

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at it, you'll need to add a 'DCO signoff' to your commits.

📝 Please follow instructions in the contributing guide to update your commits with the DCO

Full details of the Developer Certificate of Origin can be found at developercertificate.org.

The list of commits missing DCO signoff:

• 74dd69a Merge branch 'cert-manager:main' into addPKCSPasswd

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[jetstack-bot]

@arsenalzp: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-trust-manager-verify	2d4b1fa	link	true	/test pull-trust-manager-verify
pull-trust-manager-smoke	2d4b1fa	link	true	/test pull-trust-manager-smoke

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.