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

Allow "Issuer" and "Subject" during a verification to be the Distinguished Names "Common Name" Fields of the x509 certificates #3835

Closed
vigno88 opened this issue Aug 18, 2024 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@vigno88
Copy link

vigno88 commented Aug 18, 2024

Description

Allow "Issuer" and "Subject" during a verification to be the Distinguished Names "Common Name" Fields.

When using a public CA (similar to https://linuxera.org/signing-verifying-container-images-with-cosign-own-pki/), setting extensions to a certificate is not always possible. In this case, using the "Common Name" fields of Subject and Issuer would allow the Issuer and subject to still be verified, but by using "standard" x509 information.

A new CheckOpts could be added UseCommonNames and the CheckCertificatePolicy function could set oidcIssuer to cert.Issuer.CommonName and sans to []string{cert.Subject.CommonName} when the new option is set.

@vigno88 vigno88 added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 18, 2024
@haydentherapper
Copy link
Contributor

Marking as dup, see #2279 (comment).

In Cosign, we currently expect certificates conform to the Sigstore certificate profile. I'd prefer to see this implemented as an inspect command that lets verifiers apply custom policy checks rather than grow the API. Long-term, we could support more of these options, but would want to do so in a dedicated API for bring-your-own PKI that doesn't conform to the certificate profile.

@haydentherapper haydentherapper closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Aug 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants