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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Remove the option of encrypting secrets in etcd via a locally stored key. #77369

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 3, 2019
Merged

Remove the option of encrypting secrets in etcd via a locally stored key. #77369

merged 1 commit into from
May 3, 2019

Conversation

immutableT
Copy link
Contributor

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:
Currently, clusters created via kube.up script will enable etcd level encryption via a key stored on the same volume as the encrypted etcd database. Not only does this not address the intended threat model of being able to protect secrets stored in etcd against offline attacks, but also this may create a false sense of security for the users.

Users interested in encrypting secrets in etcd should consider using KMS Plugin for CloudKMS.
https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/k8s-cloudkms-plugin

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels May 2, 2019
@immutableT
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @mikedanese

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels May 2, 2019
neolit123
neolit123 reviewed May 2, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@neolit123 neolit123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/priority important-longterm
/sig gcp

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. sig/gcp and removed needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels May 2, 2019
@mikedanese
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: immutableT, mikedanese

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 2, 2019
@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel or /hold comment for consistent failures.

1 similar comment
@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel or /hold comment for consistent failures.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit eb41c9c into kubernetes:master May 3, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@neolit123 neolit123 neolit123 left review comments

@cjcullen cjcullen Awaiting requested review from cjcullen

@mwielgus mwielgus Awaiting requested review from mwielgus

Assignees

@mikedanese mikedanese

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@immutableT @mikedanese @k8s-ci-robot @fejta-bot @neolit123