Remove constraints on secret name #1541
Conversation
|
@ashley-cui @vrothberg PTAL |
|
I think we still need a restriction on not allowing |
|
@ashley-cui @vrothberg @nalind PTAL |
pkg/secrets/secrets_test.go
Outdated
| require.Error(t, err) | ||
| _, err = manager.Store("a.", []byte("mydata"), drivertype, storeOpts) | ||
| _, err = manager.Store("file/path", []byte("mydata"), drivertype, storeOpts) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Non-blocking nit: this test should be turned into a table-driven one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, probably worth doing the work after all in this PR. We should also test for an error on an empty string and test > 253.
pkg/secrets/secrets.go
Outdated
| if !secretNameRegexp.MatchString(name) || len(name) > 253 || strings.HasSuffix(name, "-") || strings.HasSuffix(name, ".") { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("only 253 [a-zA-Z0-9-_.] characters allowed, and the start and end character must be [a-zA-Z0-9]: %s: %w", name, errInvalidSecretName) | ||
| if len(name) == 0 || !secretNameRegexp.MatchString(name) { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("secret name %q can not include '=' or '/' and must be at least one character: %w", name, errInvalidSecretName) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we also mention the null character?
|
CI barks
|
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: rhatdan, vrothberg 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 |
|
LGTM at best I can tell. I'll defer to others for final merge. |
No description provided.