Make insecure flag in discovery granular

[krnowak]

In the beginning insecure only meant "I want to perform discovery over HTTP if HTTPS didn't work". But right now it means "I want to perform discovery over HTTP if HTTPS didn't work and I even want to send my credentials over HTTP". These meaning should be split.

The functions with insecure flag are discovery.DiscoverPublicKeys, discovery.DiscoverEndpoints and discovery.DiscoverWalk. I only checked discovery/discovery.go and discovery/http.go.

I didn't check if there are some other parts of this project that do similar things.

[alban]

I would like an insecure flag to allow https with invalid certificates. Right now, it is not possible to use https with invalid certificate even if insecure=true. That would be useful for some tests such as rkt/rkt#1822.

So we'd need several flags:

• insecureTls: don't check certificates
• insecureHttp: allow fallback on http
• maybe: insecureCredentials: allow sending credentials on http or on https with unchecked certificate.

[blixtra]

What's the status of the insecureCredentials? Is this deemed worth having?

[jonboulle]

Do we have a use case? Would someone want one but not the other?

[blixtra]

IMO, we should just go with insecureHTTP. I would assume that if one uses insecureHTTP then one knows secrets may be sent in the clear and is ok with that.

[jonboulle]

Seems reasonable to me.

Chris Kühl [email protected] schrieb am Fr., 8. Jan. 2016 10:40:

IMO, we should just go with insecureHTTP. I would assume that if one uses
insecureHTTP then one knows secrets may be sent in the clear and is ok with
that.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#545 (comment).

[blixtra]

Is it fair to close this then?