20231012-keylog-export-warning-fix#6861
Conversation
…figure time, then build cleanly.
|
Do we want the configuration process to halt with an error, requiring the user to take action? I didn't notice the warning when using the following configuration. Not sure if I missed something but my suggested solution is just as good as this one except it doesn't affect non-haproxy users. |
|
We don't want the config process to halt with an error here. The presumption is that when someone manually adds We also don't want to make this haproxy-specific because it isn't haproxy-specific, it's keylog-specific. |
|
note "CAVP self-test" failure is false positive on the poorly chosen branch name |
|
oh I forgot to link #6852 to this. |
Given this presumption, the proposed fix is acceptable. However, I have a minor suggestion Nitpick: I would have expected that option #3 below would be a better choice. Before: After: Optional, after (with #ifndef WOLFSSL_HAPROXY guard): |
|
We don't want The haproxy people were understandably surprised when they found that this wasn't the case. That's not specific to haproxy -- anyone will be surprised if activating a feature through |
|
I thought I heard David say that we don't want someone to inadvertently enable it in a production environment. The specific purpose of the error is for someone to intentionally modify or edit the code to disable it. What I suggested only serves to mitigate potential harm (Ensure haproxy is satisfied without impacting anyone else.). I'll leave it up to you since @dgarske approved the PR, which seems to contradict what was discussed anyway. |
There are valid reasons to support a way to build this feature without a warn->error. We just want it to be intentional. If it requires |
|
There are several motivations in play here. First, we don't want to take on technical debt around a special-case clause with no technical rationale (here, a warning issued, except for haproxy "because reasons") that will surprise in the future. Second, we can give haproxy what they want without a special-case clause, because they're autotools users -- i.e., we're retaining a codebase that will warn, one way or the other, when the feature is enabled. Third, there is plenty of precedent for other configurable features with security implications ( |
configure.acandsrc/tls.c: fix--enable-keylog-exportto warn at configure time, then build cleanly.tested with
wolfssl-multi-test.sh ... check-self check-file-modes check-source-text check-shell-scripts check-configure all-gcc-c99.