Skip to content
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

added the ability to renew certs and view their expiration dates #1461

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Dec 21, 2023

Conversation

adrum
Copy link
Contributor

@adrum adrum commented Dec 20, 2023

I was helping a teammate today resolve an issue with a certificate issue locally. After discovering the cert had expired, I thought it might be nice to expose certificate expiration dates when listing secured sites. It would also be nice to be able to renew those certs.

This PR adds both of those features.

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

I like the idea.

And I follow your thinking in terms of the 60-days and 368-days.

That said, I suspect most devs don't care what the expiration date is on local certs, they just want them to never expire.
So, if any are expired, they probably just want to renew everything for another year. (as opposed to the default of only renewing those expiring in next 2 months).

Thus, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on defaulting the renew() to just refresh everything?

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

Would it also make sense to call renew() during valet install (which is recommended to run after upgrading), so that any previously-existing certs are refreshed, especially those that expired on an old install that's been restored, etc?

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

In the past I've simply run valet tld test to re-issue certs on all secured domains. But renew is certainly more intuitive, so thanks!

@adrum
Copy link
Contributor Author

adrum commented Dec 20, 2023

I like the idea.

And I follow your thinking in terms of the 60-days and 368-days.

That said, I suspect most devs don't care what the expiration date is on local certs, they just want them to never expire. So, if any are expired, they probably just want to renew everything for another year. (as opposed to the default of only renewing those expiring in next 2 months).

Thus, I'm wondering what your thoughts are on defaulting the renew() to just refresh everything?

So I just made this change, and I had to authenticate (TouchID, thankfully) each site's new certificate. I can see how this would be annoying to do every time. However, this would likely only be run once a year.

Although, I did enjoy the simplicity of removing the days option on the renew command.

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

Ya, I haven't found a way to "batch-authenticate" (jump into sudo once for the whole group) from the CLI yet, since MacOS 11.

@adrum
Copy link
Contributor Author

adrum commented Dec 20, 2023

I've not gone looking for the answer myself, but it feels like we shouldn't have to trust the individual cert if the CA is trusted. I'm fairly certain we could skip trusting the cert, but I would have to test and check.

Do you know the answer off the top of your head?

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

I believe what's triggering the password prompts is the registering of the certs into the keychain. Not sure that can be skipped.

@adrum
Copy link
Contributor Author

adrum commented Dec 20, 2023

Yeah, that is what is triggering it. I think as long as the CA is trusted, that's unnecessary. I'll try to spin up a clean environment this weekend and test it.

If I confirm it's optional, I will come up with a way to make it skippable via a parameter so we can only skip it when it running renew. That way, existing behavior is unchanged.

What do you think?

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

If it's optional, then let's bypass it by default ... cuz it's really unfriendly to be prompted a dozen times unexpectedly.

I'm noting that there are several places that handle certs: valet secure, tld, renew and I think proxy secured.
Maybe the valet config.json file is the spot where someone could set a flag to always register_site_certs_in_keychain if they require it for a certain reason?
I wonder if this "optional" bit warrants a separate PR? Granted, it'll clash with this one. Kinda depends what you come up with.

@drbyte
Copy link
Contributor

drbyte commented Dec 20, 2023

@mattstauffer I think this PR is ready for review and merge if you're okay with it.
This latter discussion of trying to skip the password prompts, if possible, is canonically separate, so can be tackled separately.

@mattstauffer
Copy link
Collaborator

Yah, I'd love to look at that separate PR about how sites are registered. Looking forward to that.

For now, reviewing this.

$sites = collect(Site::secured())->map(function ($url) {
return ['Site' => $url];
});
$app->command('secured [--expiring] [--days=]', function (OutputInterface $output, $expiring = null, $days = 60) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This whole refactored method is very clean and readable. Nice work!

@mattstauffer mattstauffer merged commit 81a2b3b into laravel:master Dec 21, 2023
4 checks passed
mattstauffer added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2023
@adrum adrum deleted the feature/renew-certs branch December 22, 2023 17:42
@adrum adrum mentioned this pull request Dec 22, 2023
drbyte added a commit to drbyte/valet that referenced this pull request Dec 27, 2023
A reasonable default is set here, consistent with the default set in other places.

Fixes laravel#1464
Updates laravel#1461
driesvints pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2024
A reasonable default is set here, consistent with the default set in other places.

Fixes #1464
Updates #1461
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants