-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
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
Support localhost
integration in ssl_bind
#2711
Closed
Closed
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why change this? Looks to me like
uri.query
is still available?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So
uri.query
asuri
comes frompuma/lib/puma/dsl.rb
Lines 66 to 67 in 20dc923
key
andcert
values (&key=&cert=
).These empty values are transformed to Hash and stored in
params
variable herepuma/lib/puma/binder.rb
Line 230 in 20dc923
params
is "enriched" by new values, thus I'm transforming it back from Hash to StringThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should have a comment about this somewhere, to help future readers understand that directly (I didn't know either), maybe where
uri_query
is defined or whereparams
is passed toMiniSSL::ContextBuilder.new
. WDYT?Just mentioning this, not sure what we can do right now about it: there's another PR (#2728) changing code related to this, see https://github.com/puma/puma/pull/2728/files#diff-b771cc8da488f9700644eadd48510a23b1c2d5a7776dbc983eae1d2338536fd7. If I understand things correctly, with both these changes as-is, we would be logging
cert_pem
andcert_key
if you are using the functionality added in #2728. I guess it would be up to the PR that's merged last to deal with that :) cc @daliborThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank @dentarg for bringing up #2728, it looks like really nice work, so I'll probably wait for that to be merged, and rebase that PR on these changes. I'm not sure if that will fix this workaround here, I'll need to dive again into this ;)