Add End Entity/Certificate Profile fields to CertSafePublisher's JSON#742
Open
mwllgr wants to merge 6800 commits intoKeyfactor:mainfrom
Open
Add End Entity/Certificate Profile fields to CertSafePublisher's JSON#742mwllgr wants to merge 6800 commits intoKeyfactor:mainfrom
mwllgr wants to merge 6800 commits intoKeyfactor:mainfrom
Conversation
…est' into 'main' ECA-12287: fix adjust timeout in test Closes ECA-12287 See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1519
…es and 'removed.xml'.
…rKeyRecoverTokenRequest
no-ticket: update swagger to match api definitions See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1525
…-empty-name' into 'main' ECA-11972 - Block clone/creation of certificate profile when the name is empty or contains Closes ECA-11972 See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1517
…' into 'main' ECA-12338 - Add user-friendly error message for rename approval profile action Closes ECA-12338 See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1515
'fb-ECA-12237-Remove_ca.keystorepass_and_ca.cmskeystorepass' of https://neo.repoman.primekey.com/ejbca/ejbca into fb-ECA-12237-Remove_ca.keystorepass_and_ca.cmskeystorepass
…oken in RaMasterApiProxyBean and RaMasterApiPeerImpl
Comment out .image.tag so the correct version number from Chart.yaml is used and update src/internal.properties to make Jenkins X compute the correct build number.
ECA-12104: p11ng-cli command to list usable key pairs Closes ECA-12104 See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1378
CI pipeline step name typo fix See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1528
fix: Admin GUI French fixes See merge request ejbca/ejbca!1532
…hangs Post-upgrade hangs when `crldata_idx3` or `crldata_idx4` exist
Fix: RA GUI layout (CSS align, SDA bug, Search improv)
Update EJBCA Installation link in README to docs.keyfactor.com
Links still to be added.
…ersystems/8.3.2 L10n: French GUI fix (Peer Systems)
Added OpenSSF Best Practices badge in README
Collaborator
|
Would this normally be backwards compatible? I.e should a normal end point simply ignore the new fields? |
Author
|
Thanks for the quick response @primetomas! I assume software that receives the JSON would usually not care if there are more fields than initially known. As I did not remove any fields I think this shouldn't really be a problem. |
hesunmark
force-pushed
the
main
branch
2 times, most recently
from
647a632 to
e3961c2
Compare
Collaborator
|
I'm sorry, but we just pushed EJBCA 9.0 to GitHub, which means the PR is messed up and have to be redone/rebased. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
12 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Describe your changes
This pull request introduces five additional fields in CertSafePublisher's JSON POST data:
usernamecertificateProfileIdcertificateProfileNameendEntityProfileIdendEntityProfileNameDue to the JSON structure changes, a documentation update at https://doc.primekey.com/ejbca/ejbca-operations/ejbca-ca-concept-guide/publishers-overview/custom-publishers/cert-safe-publisher-for-an-https-server would be necessary.
One might even think about making these changes additional for existing EJBCA installations by using a dedicated checkbox (as a "feature flag", probably?) as some systems might not handle the newly introduced fields correctly.
How has this been tested?
We're currently using the CertSafePublisher with these changes in several systems running EJBCA. The implementation publishes certificate data to a custom API which consumes the JSON content and then publishes certificate details into a dedicated Jira project.
I currently do not have any possibility to execute EJBCA's unit tests, so extending the existing
CertSafePublisherUnitTestmight be necessary.Checklist before requesting a review