|
| 1 | +--- |
| 2 | +title: "Opt-Out of self-signed CAs (and their certs)" |
| 3 | +authors: [ "@joshuatcasey" ] |
| 4 | +status: "proposed" |
| 5 | +sponsor: [ "@cfryanr", "@ashish-amarnath" ] |
| 6 | +approval_date: "TBD" |
| 7 | +--- |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +*Disclaimer*: Proposals are point-in-time designs and decisions. |
| 10 | +Once approved and implemented, they become historical documents. |
| 11 | +If you are reading an old proposal, please be aware that the |
| 12 | +features described herein might have continued to evolve since. |
| 13 | + |
| 14 | +# Opt-Out of self-signed CAs (and their certs) |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | +## Problem Statement |
| 17 | + |
| 18 | +Pinniped's Concierge, Supervisor, and Local-User-Authenticator today require the use of self-signed certificate |
| 19 | +authorities (CAs). These self-signed CAs are used for a variety of purposes, but generally are used to sign leaf |
| 20 | +certificates used to serve TLS or sign leaf certificates for client authentication (mTLS). |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | +Using self-signed certificates can mean that custom CA bundles need to be installed on client machines so that clients |
| 23 | +can perform TLS verification with a Pinniped endpoint. As of Pinniped v0.32.0, any endpoints that are meant to be |
| 24 | +visited by a client machine can use external certificates. In particular, each Supervisor `FederationDomain` serves |
| 25 | +OIDC discovery and web endpoints that are meant to be visited by client machines, and each Concierge `ImpersonationProxy` |
| 26 | +is an endpoint meant to be visited by client machines. This proposal will not change configuration for those endpoints. |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +However, Pinniped does expose various endpoints for Kubernetes-internal use, such as to serve a `/healthz` endpoint |
| 29 | +or an endpoint that backs an `APIService` (only the Kubernetes API Service will call an `APIService`), as well as |
| 30 | +create certificates for client authentication (when the impersonation proxy is enabled). Pinniped will generate its own |
| 31 | +CA certificate and any leaf certificates that it needs. |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +## Terminology / Concepts |
| 34 | + |
| 35 | +* Self-signed certificate: A certificate not signed by a publicly-trusted CA authority. |
| 36 | +* Certificate Authority (CA): A certificate (with `isCA: true`) used to issue intermediate certificates or leaf |
| 37 | +certificates, such as certificates for serving TLS or certificates for client authentication (mTLS). |
| 38 | +* Generated certificate: A certificate generated by Pinniped, from its own CAs. By definition these generated certificates |
| 39 | +are not themselves self-signed, since they are always signed by a CA (even if that CA is self-signed). |
| 40 | +* External certificate: A certificate provided by something outside of Pinniped, such as `cert-manager`. Usually this |
| 41 | +is a leaf certificate (to serve TLS, for example), but could be a CA certificate. |
| 42 | +* Secret type `kubernetes.io/tls`: Secrets that must have keys `tls.crt` and `tls.key` that can contain either a CA, |
| 43 | +intermediate, or leaf certificate. See https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/configuration/secret/#tls-secrets. |
| 44 | +* `cert-manager`: A [tool](https://cert-manager.io/) to manage certificates used within a cluster. Generally outputs |
| 45 | +secrets of type `kubernetes.io/tls`, and may populate an additional data field `ca.crt` with a higher-level certificate |
| 46 | +if available. |
| 47 | +* CA Bundle: A collection of certificates used to verify TLS or some other certificate signature. Usually should only |
| 48 | +contain CA or intermediate certificates (not leaf certificates that should be rotated frequently), and should never |
| 49 | +contain private keys. |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +## Proposal |
| 52 | + |
| 53 | +TBD |
| 54 | + |
| 55 | +### Goals and Non-goals |
| 56 | + |
| 57 | +Goal: |
| 58 | +* Pinniped should provide enough configuration options for Pinniped administrators to completely avoid using self-signed CAs |
| 59 | +* Pinniped should generally expect external certificates to be leaf certificates (to serve TLS, for example). Pinniped |
| 60 | +will need a CA certificate when the impersonation proxy is enabled, in order to issue client certificates for mTLS. |
| 61 | +* Pinniped should rely on Kubernetes standards such as secrets with type `kubernetes.io/tls`, instead of coupling itself |
| 62 | +to any specific tool such as `cert-manager`. However, Pinniped will defer to a `ca.crt` field for CA bundles if that |
| 63 | +field is available. |
| 64 | + |
| 65 | +Non-goals: |
| 66 | +* It is not a goal of this proposal to remove Pinniped's self-signed CAs (and require the user to configure all CAs and |
| 67 | +certificates). Pinniped should continue to generate any necessary CAs and certificates that are not externally provided. |
| 68 | +* It is not a goal of this proposal to change how the Supervisor signs the ID tokens that it issues. Those tokens are |
| 69 | +signed by a ECDSA private key specific to each `FederationDomain`. Clients that need to validate tokens issued by the |
| 70 | +Pinniped Supervisor can obtain the public key as per OIDC specifications, not through PKI distribution. |
| 71 | +* It is not a goal of this proposal to change configuration for `FederationDomain` or `ImpersonationProxy` resources |
| 72 | +that already accept external certificates as of v0.32.0 |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | +#### API Changes |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | +TBD |
| 77 | + |
| 78 | +#### Configuration Changes |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | +TBD |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | +#### Upgrades |
| 83 | + |
| 84 | +TBD |
| 85 | + |
| 86 | +#### Tests |
| 87 | + |
| 88 | +TBD |
| 89 | + |
| 90 | +#### New Dependencies |
| 91 | + |
| 92 | +No. |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | +#### Performance Considerations |
| 95 | + |
| 96 | +No. |
| 97 | + |
| 98 | +#### Observability Considerations |
| 99 | + |
| 100 | +TBD |
| 101 | + |
| 102 | +#### Security Considerations |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | +TBD |
| 105 | + |
| 106 | +#### Usability Considerations |
| 107 | + |
| 108 | +TBD |
| 109 | + |
| 110 | +#### Documentation Considerations |
| 111 | + |
| 112 | +TBD |
| 113 | + |
| 114 | +### Other Approaches Considered |
| 115 | + |
| 116 | +TBD |
| 117 | + |
| 118 | +## Open Questions |
| 119 | + |
| 120 | +TBD |
| 121 | + |
| 122 | +## Answered Questions |
| 123 | + |
| 124 | +TBD |
| 125 | + |
| 126 | +## Implementation Plan |
| 127 | + |
| 128 | +TBD |
| 129 | + |
| 130 | +## Implementation PRs |
| 131 | + |
| 132 | +* TBD |
0 commit comments