Commit graph

3 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Matt Ellis
ccbc84ecc1 Add an additional test case
This was used as a motivating example during an in person discussion
with Luke.
2019-05-15 12:03:48 -07:00
Matt Ellis
4368830448 Rework secret annotation algorithm slightly
We adopt a new algoritm for annotating secrets, which works as
follows:

If the source and destinations are both property maps, annotate their
secrets deeply.

Otherwise, if there is an property in both the input and output arrays
with the same name and the value in the inputs has secrets /anywhere/
in it, mark the output itself a secret.

This means, for example, an array in the inputs with a secret value as
one of the elmenets will mean in the outputs the entire array value is
marked as a secret. This is done because arrays often are treated as
sets by providers and so we really shouldn't consider ordering. It
also means that if a value is added to the array as part of the
operation we still mark the new array as an output even though the
values may not be indentical to the inputs.
2019-05-15 09:33:02 -07:00
Matt Ellis
af2a2d0f42 Correctly flow secretness across structured values
For providers which do not natively support secrets (which is all of
them today), we annotate output values coming back from the provider
if there is a coresponding secret input in the inputs we passed in.

This logic was not tearing into rich objects, so if you passed a
secret as a member of an array or object into a resource provider, we
would lose the secretness on the way back.

Because of the interaction with Check (where we call Check and then
take the values returned by the provider as inputs for all calls to
Diff/Update), this would apply not only to the Output values of a
resource but also the Inputs (because the secret metadata would not
flow from the inputs of check to the outputs).

This change augments our logic which transfers secrets metadata from
one property map to another to handle these additional cases.
2019-05-15 09:32:25 -07:00