-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 612
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
Populate x509.Certificate.Policies field #7940
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Closes letsencrypt#7148. Signed-off-by: Eng Zer Jun <[email protected]>
ZLint requires the field to be set. Signed-off-by: Eng Zer Jun <[email protected]>
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.
ZLint still requires the PolicyIdentifiers
field to be populated so we cannot drop the PolicyIdentifiers
field completely yet.
https://github.com/letsencrypt/boulder/actions/runs/12731876566/job/35486388841#step:6:22:
failed lint(s): e_sub_ca_certificate_policies_missing ()
I have submitted an issue zmap/zlint#910 to ZLint repository.
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.
This PR does not close #7148. In order to fully complete that ticket, it needs to also address the PolicyIdentifiers/Policies fields during issuance of Subscriber certificates, as well as anywhere else we construct an x509.Certificate. There may be other places I missed, you should search for them.
Reference: letsencrypt#7940 (review) Signed-off-by: Eng Zer Jun <[email protected]>
Populated the I performed a search in VSCode and found 8 occurrences of the word |
Reference: letsencrypt#7940 (review) Signed-off-by: Eng Zer Jun <[email protected]>
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.
LGTM, I think this approach makes sense. Requesting second review from the team.
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.
Thanks for the contribution @Juneezee! Overall I think this change looks really good, I have just few suggestions to improve it a little more.
Reference: letsencrypt#7940 (review) Signed-off-by: Eng Zer Jun <[email protected]>
Just FYI, this PR is now on-hold until we're using Go 1.24 in our go.mod. No further action is required on your end. |
Part of #7148.
Note
Starting from Go 1.24,
x509.Certificate.Policies
is the default field used for marshalling certificates. golang/go@918765b