Ignore encryption selection options for binary store (and warn when they are used) #1927
+71
−6
Conversation
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
hiddeco
reviewed
Sep 26, 2025
sops.go
Outdated
Comment on lines
729
to
733
| // SingleValueStore is the interface for determining whether a store uses only | ||
| // one single key and no comments. This is basically identifying the binary store. | ||
| type SingleValueStore interface { | ||
| IsSingleValueStore() bool | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it would be slightly more logical to "inverse" this into:
Suggested change
| // SingleValueStore is the interface for determining whether a store uses only | |
| // one single key and no comments. This is basically identifying the binary store. | |
| type SingleValueStore interface { | |
| IsSingleValueStore() bool | |
| } | |
| // SingleValueStore is the interface for determining whether a store uses only | |
| // one single key and no comments. This is basically identifying the binary store. | |
| type SingleValueStore interface { | |
| Store | |
| IsSingleValueStore() bool | |
| } |
By doing this, a Store which is not a "single value" Store can forget about implementing the method. This also allows you to simply type-check the Store against the SingleValueStore interface (instead of calling the method).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Addressed in f4b4c04.
felixfontein
force-pushed
the
binary-store-encryption-opts
branch
from
0dd11c8 to
0d9b77c
Compare
|
(Rebased first to resolve the conflicts; will now look at the review comments.) |
hiddeco
approved these changes
Sep 27, 2025
…hey are used). Signed-off-by: Felix Fontein <felix@fontein.de>
Signed-off-by: Felix Fontein <felix@fontein.de>
felixfontein
force-pushed
the
binary-store-encryption-opts
branch
from
f4b4c04 to
6bb6621
Compare
|
@hiddeco thanks for reviewing and your comments! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
It happened more than once that someone "encrypted" a file using the binary store, which resulted in simply base64 encoding the source since encryption was essentially disabled since some encryption selection option prevented the
datakey to be encrypted.This PR allows to identify input stores that yield a single key (without comments), and disables all selection options in this case. It also prints warnings for options that potentially disable encryption.
Regarding the warnings: we could also simply not print any warning (might be less annoying to users who simply want to use the same config everywhere), or make the warnings more specific (if they match the
datakey; for that we need to provide the key name as well). @getsops/maintainers what do you think?Fixes #1822.