Skip to content
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

Remove JSON pre-processing for "SECRET:*" values #14

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

debovema
Copy link
Contributor

This pre-processing is conflicting with secret.PropertyProcessor at

func PropertyProcessor(properties map[string]interface{}) error {

@fm-tibco
Copy link

@mellistibco General question... should we support secrets only in properties? Or anywhere in the flogo.json. If its just used in properties, it makes the secret management easier and also easier to refer to in other places (you only have to set it once). The only question is it too burdensome if someone just has one secret? Would it be too much to ask to force them to use a property?

@mellistibco
Copy link
Member

I tend to think that we should support SECRET: anywhere, especially considering the ui doesn't currently support adding and editing properties...

@fm-tibco
Copy link

Does it assist in generating a "secret"?

@debovema
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think the secrets can be used anywhere (using the expression syntax =$property[some.secret] but should be declared only in properties for consistency reason.

Even if the UI assists in generating a secret, it can do it in the properties section. Currently the "SECRET:..." patterns can be directly put in the activities configuration which is not a good practice IMHO.

Other use case is the ability to use a plain-text property and change it later in the development to a secret one.

Eventually, this PR is just about removing the duplicate processing of "SECRET:..." pattern, not about changing the secret resolving method (yet).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants