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

discuss CA checksum flag for kubeadm join #50

Closed
mikedanese opened this issue Nov 22, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

discuss CA checksum flag for kubeadm join #50

mikedanese opened this issue Nov 22, 2016 · 2 comments
Labels
area/security priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence.

Comments

@mikedanese
Copy link
Member

From @errordeveloper on October 3, 2016 11:31

It could prevent MITM, where attacker has guessed the JWS token, yet hasn't provided the same CA certificate.

Copied from original issue: kubernetes/kubernetes#33918

@luxas luxas added area/security kind/enhancement priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. labels Nov 25, 2016
dgoodwin pushed a commit to dgoodwin/kubeadm that referenced this issue Feb 23, 2017
This patch adds a new binary: "checkpoint". The checkpoint program will
ensure that the latest apiserver manifest is checkpointed, in case of a
system / apiserver crash.

It is implemented via static manifests. The checkpoint program will
store a pod manifest on disk. When it detects an apiserver is not
running, it will move that file into the directory that was specified as
the kubelet's config dir. From there, the kubelet will see that pod
manifest and run it. Once the program detects both our temporary
apiserver and self-hosted apiserver is running, it will remove the
manifest from the config dir, causing the kubelet to kill it and allow
the self-hosted apiserver to take over.
@luxas
Copy link
Member

luxas commented Jun 29, 2017

@jbeda Is this something your new proposal will address? I guess so...

@jbeda
Copy link

jbeda commented Jun 30, 2017

Yeah -- feel free to close this and point it at the feature comment. If/when this results in a proposal we'll open new issues around that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/security priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants