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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

No support for certificate based secure communication #328

Open
sudhamani-hcl opened this issue Jul 11, 2023 · 9 comments
Open

No support for certificate based secure communication #328

sudhamani-hcl opened this issue Jul 11, 2023 · 9 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects

Comments

@sudhamani-hcl
Copy link
Contributor

馃殌 Feature Request

Relevant Package [REQUIRED]

This feature request is for certificate based secure communication.

Description [REQUIRED]

There is no support for certificate based secure client and server in the current version 3 of device-rest service

Describe the solution you'd like

No. It would be good if someone implements this feature.

Describe alternatives you've considered

No
@sudhamani-hcl sudhamani-hcl added the enhancement New feature or request label Jul 11, 2023
@lenny-goodell lenny-goodell added this to New Issues in Device WG via automation Jul 11, 2023
@lenny-goodell lenny-goodell added the help wanted Extra attention is needed label Jul 11, 2023
@lenny-goodell
Copy link
Member

@sudhamani-hcl , Please describe the solution you would like with details like if SSL only needed for the command requests to the device? or also for async data push from the device?

@sudhamani-hcl
Copy link
Contributor Author

sudhamani-hcl commented Jul 12, 2023

Hi @lenny-intel,

The requirement is:

  1. Device service should get secrets (certificates, private key) from the secret store.
  2. Device service should use SSL based security for command requests to end device as well as async data push from end device also.

Thanks,
Sudhamani.

@lenny-goodell
Copy link
Member

@sudhamani-hcl , SSL command requests to end device should work today. i.e. no special cert need if using standard CA certs from base Alpine image (Docker) or system (Snap)

Allowing SSL from device to device service is what will need to be added and it should be on a separate port from the standard Device Service APIs which are called from the other local EdgeX Services.

@cloudxxx8
Copy link
Member

@sudhamani-hcl you can leverage the SDK service to get secret provider to retrive credentials from the secret store
https://github.com/edgexfoundry/device-sdk-go/blob/5a7d05295c20c4306666c126d05bdc304538796c/pkg/service/service.go#L179

@sudhamani-hcl
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sudhamani-hcl , SSL command requests to end device should work today. i.e. no special cert need if using standard CA certs from base Alpine image (Docker) or system (Snap)

Thanks @lenny-intel for the input. However I have below query.
Do we not need client certificate to communicate to end devices?
If client certificate is needed, then from where it is getting in the current solution?
Thanks in advance.

@sudhamani-hcl
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sudhamani-hcl you can leverage the SDK service to get secret provider to retrive credentials from the secret store
https://github.com/edgexfoundry/device-sdk-go/blob/5a7d05295c20c4306666c126d05bdc304538796c/pkg/service/service.go#L179

Thank you @cloudxxx8 for the response.
Does this include certificate retrieval also?
We have the requirement to store client certificate and retrieve it back from the secret store to establish SSL communication with the end device. Please let us know any inputs regarding this.

@lenny-goodell
Copy link
Member

@lindseysimple lindseysimple moved this from New Issues to Icebox in Device WG Aug 8, 2023
@lindseysimple
Copy link

Hi @sudhamani-hcl , just wonder if you have any plan or bandwidth to implement this issue and edgexfoundry/device-mqtt-go#616 in the next Odessa 3.2 release? Thanks.

@sudhamani-hcl
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @lindseysimple ,

Please note that we wanted it for one of our needs and we went ahead without security. And please understand that currently we do not have bandwidth to implement this.

Thanks,
Sudhamani

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
Device WG
  
Icebox
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants