Local blobstore now supports TLS #1155
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sethboyles
force-pushed
the
blobstore_tls
branch
from
b6765e0 to
b369e20
Compare
|
|
11 tasks
Co-authored-by: Amelia Downs <[email protected]>
sethboyles
force-pushed
the
blobstore_tls
branch
from
b369e20 to
3fac8cf
Compare
ameowlia
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Please take a moment to review the questions before submitting the PR
🚫 We only accept PRs to develop branch. If this is an exception, please specify why 🚫
WHAT is this change about?
This limits the singleton-blobstore to only use TLS for all endpoints.
What customer problem is being addressed? Use customer persona to define the problem e.g. Alana is unable to...
Better security on singleton-blobstore droplet & package upload/download endpoints.
Please provide any contextual information.
This PR requires that cloudfoundry/capi-release#377, which is in capi-release 1.171.0. This is already merged into cf-d!
Has a cf-deployment including this change passed cf-acceptance-tests?
Does this PR introduce a breaking change? Please take a moment to read through the examples before answering the question.
I'm pretty sure it doesn't qualify for 7 as a breaking change? It removes an additional variable from the manifest, but I think that ops file is only meant to work with the same version of cf-deployment.
How should this change be described in cf-deployment release notes?
Does this PR introduce a new BOSH release into the base cf-deployment.yml manifest or any ops-files?
Does this PR make a change to an experimental or GA'd feature/component?
Please provide Acceptance Criteria for this change?
There should be no noticeable behavioral change. This port will now be used for package/droplet uploads and downloads and will be encrypted on the blobstore vm.
What is the level of urgency for publishing this change?
Tag your pair, your PM, and/or team!
@dalvarado