Skip to content

Conversation

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member

@Aayush-Abhyarthi Aayush-Abhyarthi commented Sep 23, 2024

Description

This PR adds sensitive tag to the data variable in the secret submodule.
https://github.ibm.com/GoldenEye/issues/issues/10858

Release required?

  • No release
  • Patch release (x.x.X)
  • Minor release (x.X.x)
  • Major release (X.x.x)
Release notes content

This PR adds sensitive tag to the data variable in the secret submodule.

Run the pipeline

If the CI pipeline doesn't run when you create the PR, the PR requires a user with GitHub collaborators access to run the pipeline.

Run the CI pipeline when the PR is ready for review and you expect tests to pass. Add a comment to the PR with the following text:

/run pipeline

Checklist for reviewers

  • If relevant, a test for the change is included or updated with this PR.
  • If relevant, documentation for the change is included or updated with this PR.

For mergers

  • Use a conventional commit message to set the release level. Follow the guidelines.
  • Include information that users need to know about the PR in the commit message. The commit message becomes part of the GitHub release notes.
  • Use the Squash and merge option.

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

Reason for skipping the upgrade test - Making the data variable sensitive will update the resource "ibm_code_engine_secret" "ce_secret block". But this is not a breaking change. The value of the data variable before and after being marked as sensitive = true remains same and no resource is being destroyed.

Copy link
Contributor

@ocofaigh ocofaigh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Isn't this also exposed in the root level module too? So we need the changes there too

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

@ocofaigh data variable is a part of secrets variable at the root level. Should I mark the complete secrets object as sensitive?

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@ocofaigh
Copy link
Contributor

@shemau Could you take a look please? Is it valid to mark all these as sensitive?

@ocofaigh ocofaigh removed their request for review September 24, 2024 11:25
Copy link
Contributor

@shemau shemau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems that somewhere everything got turned around. It seems that the data (an input variable) may contain sensitive information.
IMHO this information is never output by the module.

So the requirement is probably to work through the various input options, in the main module, in the DA, in the examples IFF they pass secret input/variables to the secret submodule and make sure the information is marked as sensitive at the top.

If/when the whole object is marked sensitive there would be new restrictions on using ANY part of the object as a for_each block.

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

@Aayush-Abhyarthi
Copy link
Member Author

/run pipeline

Copy link
Contributor

@shemau shemau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@ocofaigh ocofaigh merged commit 259c647 into main Sep 30, 2024
2 checks passed
@ocofaigh ocofaigh deleted the add-sensitive-tag branch September 30, 2024 11:37
@terraform-ibm-modules-ops
Copy link
Contributor

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.0.2 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants