5 ms·

Still early, but don't forget OpenBao fork of Vault. https://github.com/openbao https://github.com/openbao

by rapnie 3y ago

tanepiper 3y ago
Amazing - we actually had a secrets PoC for our org paused recently, and Vault is one of the options. But honestly this looks like it could solve a few things in our team right now.
- sanjay313 3y ago
  [dead]
sgt 3y ago
What about OpenMao? https://openmao.panchuang.net/#/ https://openmao.panchuang.net/#/
cipherboy 3y ago
Happy to answer technical questions about OpenBao as people have, though some might be best directed at the Technical Steering Committee, which I do not represent. :-)
- candiddevmike 3y ago
  I owe you a PR review on the source IP lock, I haven't had time to test it yet. It's awesome that you address it though, thank you.
  - cipherboy 3y ago
    Thank you for the RFE! Looking at the X-Forwarded-For handling might be good, I wasn't able to add tests for that easily, though maybe the existing test could be used as a template if you get time. I think we depend on nginx or Caddy elsewhere, but the pkiext tests might also serve as a good reference. :-)
- merb 3y ago
  Why did you kill most storage plugins? I hoped that I could move from vault to openbao , but it looks like that is not the case. I can understand the removal of secrets engines and stuff but the storage plugins should’ve been kept at least for the first few releases and than dropped a few of them while giving people a way to migrate them to supported options.
  - JanMa 3y ago
    We had some discussions about this before removing all storage plugins except Raft, In-Memory and File storage as cipherboy pointed out in the sibling comment. If you're currently not using Raft, this should not stop you from adopting OpenBao if you first migrate to the Raft storage backend. Hashicorp has a tutorial on this which you can follow: https://developer.hashicorp.com/vault/tutorials/raft/raft-migration https://developer.hashicorp.com/vault/tutorials/raft/raft-mi... I've personally used the Raft storage backend in production for some years and can assure you it is rock solid.
  - cipherboy 3y ago
    Maintainability and feature development mostly. I have a few improvements I'd have liked to have see upstream, but couldn't land due to the vast storage plugin base. You're left writing to the lowest common denominator of 20 storage engines which isn't maintainable when HashiCorp only supports Raft and Consul. Take paginated lists which I've proposed as a PR. If your backend engine of choice doesn't support efficient pagination aligning with the designated semantics, you're stuck implementing it from scratch. Now do that with transactional storage, which is another upstream requested feature... And so forth. Additionally, the current contributor base is too small to support much more. Personally, I'd like to see Postgres as the only external storage engine. But I don't presently feel we have enough maintainers to justify multiple storage engines. Raft is easiest to support as it is what upstream is actively developing. It also eases migration for upstream-aligned users. My 2c. But happy to take suggestions and contributions! Edit to add: ideally I'd have liked to add an external storage plugin interface, but this would be a bit of a perf hit over native support and wouldn't be a stable target (as I'd like to see some of these things land).
    - 3y ago

Still early, but don't forget OpenBao fork of Vault. https://github.com/openbao https://github.com/openbao

by rapnie 3y ago

Still early, but don't forget OpenBao fork of Vault. https://github.com/openbao https://github.com/openbao

Amazing - we actually had a secrets PoC for our org paused recently, and Vault is one of the options. But honestly this looks like it could solve a few things in our team right now.

sanjay313 3y ago
[dead]

sgt 3y ago

What about OpenMao? https://openmao.panchuang.net/#/ https://openmao.panchuang.net/#/

cipherboy 3y ago

Happy to answer technical questions about OpenBao as people have, though some might be best directed at the Technical Steering Committee, which I do not represent. :-)

candiddevmike 3y ago
I owe you a PR review on the source IP lock, I haven't had time to test it yet. It's awesome that you address it though, thank you.
- cipherboy 3y ago
  Thank you for the RFE! Looking at the X-Forwarded-For handling might be good, I wasn't able to add tests for that easily, though maybe the existing test could be used as a template if you get time. I think we depend on nginx or Caddy elsewhere, but the pkiext tests might also serve as a good reference. :-)
merb 3y ago
Why did you kill most storage plugins? I hoped that I could move from vault to openbao , but it looks like that is not the case. I can understand the removal of secrets engines and stuff but the storage plugins should’ve been kept at least for the first few releases and than dropped a few of them while giving people a way to migrate them to supported options.
- JanMa 3y ago
  We had some discussions about this before removing all storage plugins except Raft, In-Memory and File storage as cipherboy pointed out in the sibling comment. If you're currently not using Raft, this should not stop you from adopting OpenBao if you first migrate to the Raft storage backend. Hashicorp has a tutorial on this which you can follow: https://developer.hashicorp.com/vault/tutorials/raft/raft-migration https://developer.hashicorp.com/vault/tutorials/raft/raft-mi... I've personally used the Raft storage backend in production for some years and can assure you it is rock solid.
- cipherboy 3y ago
  Maintainability and feature development mostly. I have a few improvements I'd have liked to have see upstream, but couldn't land due to the vast storage plugin base. You're left writing to the lowest common denominator of 20 storage engines which isn't maintainable when HashiCorp only supports Raft and Consul. Take paginated lists which I've proposed as a PR. If your backend engine of choice doesn't support efficient pagination aligning with the designated semantics, you're stuck implementing it from scratch. Now do that with transactional storage, which is another upstream requested feature... And so forth. Additionally, the current contributor base is too small to support much more. Personally, I'd like to see Postgres as the only external storage engine. But I don't presently feel we have enough maintainers to justify multiple storage engines. Raft is easiest to support as it is what upstream is actively developing. It also eases migration for upstream-aligned users. My 2c. But happy to take suggestions and contributions! Edit to add: ideally I'd have liked to add an external storage plugin interface, but this would be a bit of a perf hit over native support and wouldn't be a stable target (as I'd like to see some of these things land).
  - 3y ago