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

Add in audit review recurrence presets. #32843

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 3, 2023

Conversation

mdwn
Copy link
Contributor

@mdwn mdwn commented Oct 2, 2023

Access Lists now have audit review recurrence presets. These allow users to specify review frequencies of 1, 3, 6, or 12 months, and specify the 1st, 15th, or last days of the target month. Presets have been used for their simplicity over other various recurrence definition mechanisms, as these presets are much clearer than many of the other options.

@mdwn mdwn force-pushed the mike.wilson/access-list-recurrence-presets branch 2 times, most recently from 7f8547e to 25aa389 Compare October 3, 2023 15:13
api/types/accesslist/accesslist.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@mdwn mdwn force-pushed the mike.wilson/access-list-recurrence-presets branch 2 times, most recently from 4498f1c to ce1873c Compare October 3, 2023 15:41
Copy link
Contributor

@jakule jakule left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One nit

api/types/accesslist/accesslist.go Show resolved Hide resolved
Access Lists now have audit review recurrence presets. These allow users to
specify review frequencies of 1, 3, 6, or 12 months, and specify the 1st,
15th, or last days of the target month. Presets have been used for their
simplicity over other various recurrence definition mechanisms, as these
presets are much clearer than many of the other options.
@mdwn mdwn force-pushed the mike.wilson/access-list-recurrence-presets branch from ce1873c to d4d55fb Compare October 3, 2023 17:16
@mdwn mdwn enabled auto-merge October 3, 2023 17:17
@mdwn mdwn added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 3, 2023
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Oct 3, 2023
@mdwn mdwn added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 3, 2023
Merged via the queue into master with commit 049363b Oct 3, 2023
30 checks passed
@mdwn mdwn deleted the mike.wilson/access-list-recurrence-presets branch October 3, 2023 22:54
@public-teleport-github-review-bot

@mdwn See the table below for backport results.

Branch Result
branch/v13 Failed
branch/v14 Create PR

@@ -80,11 +79,40 @@ message AccessListOwner {

// AccessListAudit describes the audit configuration for an access list.
message AccessListAudit {
// frequency is a duration that describes how often an access list must be audited.
google.protobuf.Duration frequency = 1;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This change has broken the tests in teleport.e as there are tests that still refer to these fields. I'm sort of surprised and not surprised that the teleport.e tests do not run on CI, but that aside, I would have though that this sort of change of removing a field from a protobuf message goes against the major philosophy of protobuf being strong support for forward and backward compatibility. Typically fields hang around forever, but get deprecated instead of being removed. I don't know if this is the Teleport stance though - I'm coming at this from outside experience with protobuf/grpc. Perhaps because the accesslist stuff is all rather new we're ok with this but I wonder if the package name should have been teleport.accesslist.v0 (or v1alpha1) until stabilised.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You're not wrong. I was originally intending on keeping the frequency around and having it convert, but I got some pushback on that end. I have (and have had) a fix for this: https://github.com/gravitational/teleport.e/pull/2324, but it's still waiting on reviews.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants