Hi Aurélien,

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:01:44AM +0200, Aurélien Nephtali wrote:
> Anyone has more comments, ideas or remarks regarding these patches ?

Not on the patches themselves, but I think I mentioned elsewhere that
we really need to start an important discussion on the subject of how
to designate a certificate in general. Indeed :
  - with crtlists (and even without) it's possible to have overlapping
    identifiers, the first matching one wins. There are even multiple
    key types for a same SNI.

  - within a frontend there can be multiple bind lines. It's perfectly
    possible to use different sets of certs on two distinct lines, for
    example one for the public connections, and another set using the
    internal CA for the internal connections. Thus the frontend+SNI
    may not always be enough. And in fact this type of setup is not
    so rare, especially in places where you have content contributors
    who are required to present their client cert from outside but
    not from inside, where the security is much more relaxed, but
    the internal certs are exclusively used inside with a dedicated
    CA to avoid any accident.

  - at the moment cert file names are unique (one cert per file only),
    thus at first glance it could sound like files could be used as a
    unique identifier as is done with ACLs and maps. And it would
    ensure that the change can be made both on the FS and on the CLI.
    But with the ability to load certs from dirs, most of the time I
    fear that an agent connecting to a CLI will have no idea at all
    about the cert's original file name. The one adding a new cert
    will figure the name as it currently does to save it before
    reloading. But an agent designed to simply update a cert (eg:
    let's encrypt) could very well be totally unaware of its path.

  - there are probably other unique ways to identify them that I'm
    not thinking about

Thus I think it's important that a decision is taken on this and that
we don't come back in 3 months saying "hmmm finally it was a bad idea,
I cannot manage this setup with it".

Ideas or experience feedback from anyone is welcome here.

Thanks!
Willy

Reply via email to