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

Bug 1953113: template config - HSTS header's pattern accepts case insensitive and white spaces #298

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 18, 2021

Conversation

alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor

This PR makes HAProxy's config template accept HSTS headers with case insensitive directives and white spaces as stated in RFC6797.

Apart from the unit test, tested manually:

$ oc get route console
NAME      HOST/PORT                                    PATH   SERVICES   PORT    TERMINATION          WILDCARD
console   console-openshift-console.apps-crc.testing          console    https   reencrypt/Redirect   None

$ oc get route console --template='{{$a := index .metadata.annotations "haproxy.router.openshift.io/hsts_header"}}{{$a}}{{"\n"}}'
MAX-age=99999 ;   includesubdomains;   Preload

$ curl -k -is https://console-openshift-console.apps-crc.testing | grep -i strict-transport
strict-transport-security: MAX-age=99999 ;   includesubdomains;   Preload

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jun 3, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 3, 2021

@alebedev87: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1953113, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.8.0" release, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

Bug 1953113: template config - HSTS header's pattern accepts case insensitive and white spaces

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.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Jun 3, 2021
@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 3, 2021

@alebedev87: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1953113, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.8.0" release, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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.

@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @candita

pkg/router/router_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/router/router_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/router/router_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@alebedev87 alebedev87 force-pushed the bz1953113 branch 2 times, most recently from a7a339a to 659a402 Compare June 4, 2021 15:29
pkg/router/router_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/router/router_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

1 similar comment
@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

pkg/router/router_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/router/router_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -277,6 +440,12 @@ func (e mustCreate) Apply(h *harness) error {
return err
}

type mustCreateWithConfig struct {
mustCreate
configPattern string
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The name is confusing; the test actually performs a substring search, not a pattern match (such as a regexp), right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Indeed, it's not a regexp.
Didn't have many ideas for the name, renamed to configSnippet. Tell me if you have better ideas.

@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @Miciah

},
tlsTermination: routev1.TLSTerminationEdge,
},
configSnippet: `http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security 'min-age=99999'`,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we check for just the substring "http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security" to make sure there are no false negatives?

Suggested change
configSnippet: `http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security 'min-age=99999'`,
configSnippet: `http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security`,

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, the state isn't cleared between test cases, is it? So with my suggestion, this test case would always fail.

},
tlsTermination: routev1.TLSTerminationEdge,
},
configSnippet: `http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security 'max-age=99999;includesubdomains;preload;wrongdirective'`,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
configSnippet: `http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security 'max-age=99999;includesubdomains;preload;wrongdirective'`,
configSnippet: `http-response set-header Strict-Transport-Security`,

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Jun 17, 2021

Thanks! I love the improved test coverage!
/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 17, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 17, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alebedev87, Miciah

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 17, 2021
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Jun 17, 2021

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jun 17, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 17, 2021

@Miciah: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1953113, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.9.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.9.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @quarterpin

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from quarterpin June 17, 2021 18:24
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

3 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 2128bb8 into openshift:master Jun 18, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 18, 2021

@alebedev87: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 1953113 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1953113: template config - HSTS header's pattern accepts case insensitive and white spaces

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants