Skip to content

Add Conformance tests for BackendTLSPolicy validating SANs with Type dsnName #3983

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add Conformance tests for BackendTLSPolicy validating SANs with Type dsnName #3983

wants to merge 2 commits into from
+191 −3

Conversation

kl52752
Copy link
Contributor

@kl52752 kl52752 commented Aug 11, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind test
What this PR does / why we need it:
Add Conformance tests for BackendTLSPolicy validating SANs set with Type dns name
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Relates to #3979

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. kind/test cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Aug 11, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @kl52752. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 11, 2025
@kl52752
Copy link
Contributor Author

kl52752 commented Aug 11, 2025

/assign @robscott @candita @snorwin

@mikemorris
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Aug 12, 2025
robscott
robscott reviewed Aug 12, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@robscott robscott left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @kl52752!

conformance/tests/backendtlspolicy.go

// Verify that request sent to Service targeted by BackendTLSPolicy with mismatched SAN should failed.
t.Run("HTTP request send to Service targeted by BackendTLSPolicy with mismatched SAN should return HTTP error", func(t *testing.T) {
h.MakeRequestAndExpectFailure(t, suite.RoundTripper, suite.TimeoutConfig, gwAddr,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems like this will pass if any non-200 error code is returned. Can we be more specific here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually the spec is a bit vague here, error codes are not constrained but it is up to implementation how to signal the error

conformance/tests/backendtlspolicy.yaml Outdated
Comment on lines 287 to 290
subjectAltNames:
- type: Hostname
hostname: abc.example.com
hostname: "mismatch.example.com"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like it's testing a config mismatch instead of a mismatch in the cert itself. Can we also include a test that covers a case where the config lines up but the cert served by the backend does not match either the configured hostname or the SANs?

snorwin
snorwin reviewed Aug 12, 2025
View reviewed changes
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kl52752
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from robscott. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@kl52752 kl52752 marked this pull request as draft August 12, 2025 08:37
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Aug 12, 2025
@kl52752 kl52752 marked this pull request as ready for review August 12, 2025 15:58
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Aug 12, 2025
snorwin
snorwin reviewed Aug 13, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@snorwin snorwin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I’ve run the tests with the airlock-microgateway implementation, all of them passed.

conformance/tests/backendtlspolicy.yaml
- type: Hostname
hostname: efg.example.com
- type: Hostname
hostname: yjh.example.com
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you also plan to add some test with SAN type URI?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes but I wanted to do this in next PR, because there will be more changes related to certificate creation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@robscott robscott robscott left review comments

@snorwin snorwin snorwin left review comments

@mikemorris mikemorris Awaiting requested review from mikemorris

@sunjayBhatia sunjayBhatia Awaiting requested review from sunjayBhatia

@howardjohn howardjohn Awaiting requested review from howardjohn

@LiorLieberman LiorLieberman Awaiting requested review from LiorLieberman

Assignees

@robscott robscott

@candita candita

@snorwin snorwin

Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/test ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@kl52752 @k8s-ci-robot @mikemorris @robscott @snorwin @candita