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

feat: google cloud provider #98

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Aug 20, 2024
Merged

feat: google cloud provider #98

merged 10 commits into from
Aug 20, 2024

Conversation

mturetskii
Copy link
Member

Description of the Change

This pull request introduces support for Google Cloud Platform (GCP), enabling our platform to leverage a wide range of cloud services provided by Google.

@mturetskii mturetskii self-assigned this Aug 13, 2024
@mturetskii mturetskii linked an issue Aug 14, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
all4code
all4code previously approved these changes Aug 15, 2024
resource "google_kms_crypto_key" "vault_unseal_key" {
name = "vault-unseal"
key_ring = google_kms_key_ring.vault_key_ring.id
rotation_period = "100000s"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

27.77 hours looks a bit strange to me. Couldn't we set it to 24h at least or follow AWS and Azure approach where it's 365d?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can't use 24h here, It must be greater than a day (ie, 86400).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done. Made it 365d.

"""
Restrict access to cloud native terraform remote state storage
"""
pass
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there any possible way to protect state storage on GCP?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done. Found a way, it should work fine in our case.

@@ -1052,3 +1085,14 @@ def setup_param_validator(params: StateStore) -> bool:
return False

return True


def get_dns_deployment_name_by_cloud_provider(cloud_provider) -> str:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's a good candidate to go under cloud provider manager "interface"

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done, moved to cloud manager class.

sergs-pci
sergs-pci previously approved these changes Aug 16, 2024
@all4code all4code dismissed stale reviews from sergs-pci and themself via e14aa40 August 16, 2024 18:16
mturetskii and others added 3 commits August 19, 2024 13:02
…d implement GCP storage security hardening

- Fixed comments for clarity and accuracy.
- Added logic to check the installation of additional gcloud components.
- Introduced typing annotations for better code clarity and robustness.
- Generated and updated docstrings for all methods using reST style.
- Implemented logic to enforce strict access control policies on GCP storage buckets.
…:CloudGeometry/cg-devx-core-private into feature/google-cloud-provider
@mturetskii mturetskii merged commit a4820ec into main Aug 20, 2024
@mturetskii mturetskii deleted the feature/google-cloud-provider branch August 20, 2024 13:04
@sergs-pci sergs-pci changed the title Feature/google cloud provider feat: google cloud provider Sep 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

GCP support
3 participants