-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 259
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
tests: Add CRI tests for integrity protection of LCOW layers #1193
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one request, otherwise LGTM
t, | ||
[]string{imageLcowAlpine}, | ||
WithSandboxAnnotations(map[string]string{ | ||
"containerd.io/diff/io.microsoft.storage.lcow.append-dm-verity": "true", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This depends on this getting in as is right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yup, that too. added a feature flag to enable local testing at least.
I think we should hold off to see if anyone has opinions on the labels vs annotations for the containerd PR, as that would change this slightly. The tests LGTM though so if the ctrd one goes in feel free to check in |
9d8f078
to
e77c84e
Compare
Add tests that validate that integrity protection is checked when LCOW layers have dm-verity hashes appended. Signed-off-by: Maksim An <maksiman@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Maksim An <maksiman@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Maksim An <maksiman@microsoft.com>
e77c84e
to
e38656e
Compare
I think we shouldn't wait for the upstream PR here. The tests are hidden behind a feature flag which is not added to |
@dcantah lmk if you have any concerns with merging this. |
Sure, I was mainly hesitant on the labels vs annotations discussion. I still don't have a great view of which to use. I'd ping Mike Brown on the PR for his opinion. |
If anything it's a one line change depending on what is decided between the two. |
Related work items: microsoft#1067, microsoft#1097, microsoft#1119, microsoft#1170, microsoft#1176, microsoft#1180, microsoft#1181, microsoft#1182, microsoft#1183, microsoft#1184, microsoft#1185, microsoft#1186, microsoft#1187, microsoft#1188, microsoft#1189, microsoft#1191, microsoft#1193, microsoft#1194, microsoft#1195, microsoft#1196, microsoft#1197, microsoft#1200, microsoft#1201, microsoft#1202, microsoft#1203, microsoft#1204, microsoft#1205, microsoft#1206, microsoft#1207, microsoft#1209, microsoft#1210, microsoft#1211, microsoft#1218, microsoft#1219, microsoft#1220, microsoft#1223
Add tests that validate that integrity protection is checked when
LCOW layers have dm-verity hashes appended.
Depends on:
Signed-off-by: Maksim An maksiman@microsoft.com