-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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
feat: support more sensitive fields for encryption #11095
feat: support more sensitive fields for encryption #11095
Conversation
end | ||
|
||
local encrypted = core.table.try_read_attr(local_conf, "apisix", "data_encryption", | ||
"enable_encrypt_fields") and (core.config.type == "etcd") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need to add this ?
I think the check_schema
is run before the fields encrypted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if data encryption is enabled then the secret length will be more than 32. So we should not check the length if data encryption is on.
I think the check_schema is run before the fields encrypted.
yes. This is why we cannot use the code in plugin.lua
, so I just copied the logic 😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if data encryption is enabled then the secret length will be more than 32.
Why the secret length will be more than 32. Is the secret is encrypted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, exactly.
Description
Some sensitive plugin fields aren't under the protection of
encrypt_fields
feature. It has been addressed in this PR.Checklist