sparse-intern-71089
02/28/2019, 10:56 PMwhite-balloon-205
bitter-oil-46081
02/28/2019, 11:27 PMorange-policeman-59119
02/28/2019, 11:54 PMbitter-oil-46081
03/01/2019, 10:07 PMThanks for following up! As a follow-up question, is there a story for asymmetric encryption of secrets?Sorry for the delayed response, @orange-policeman-59119. Are you saying that you asking about a model where you encrypt secrets using some public key and then hand the private key to
pulumi
during a preview
or update
so that pulumi is unable to decode the secrets without a key you provide? We do have an issue tracking the ability to plugin in a provider that handles encryption/decryption of secrets. See https://github.com/pulumi/pulumi/issues/1547, which would be our answer here.orange-policeman-59119
03/01/2019, 10:20 PMPulumi.stack.yaml
with secrets to my Git repo. I'd like an engineer to be able to run `pulumi config set --secret foo bar`without needing the symmetric key. That is, in addition to the symmetric key, it would be nice to be able to set an asymmetric key, where the public key is stored in the config file, and the private key is used by the CI/CD system or unlocked with a symmetric key.orange-policeman-59119
03/01/2019, 10:26 PMbitter-oil-46081
03/01/2019, 10:26 PMPulumi.<stack-name>.yaml
This means that pulumi config set --secret
could be run by any engineer (it just needs to encrypt a value using the public key, which is right in the file) but operations like pulumi config get --show-secrets
, pulumi preview
and pulumi update
which require you to actually decrypt the secret would require you to provide the private key somehow (i.e. you could imagine a --private-key-path
argument you'd pass to these commands).
Do I have the right of it there, @orange-policeman-59119?orange-policeman-59119
03/01/2019, 10:26 PMorange-policeman-59119
03/01/2019, 10:26 PMorange-policeman-59119
03/01/2019, 10:28 PMorange-policeman-59119
03/01/2019, 10:29 PMbitter-oil-46081
03/01/2019, 10:31 PM