[ASCII-2591] Migrate Agent IPC clients to check IPC cert #32369
Conversation
Go Package Import DifferencesBaseline: 274cdd8
|
Package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=52154296 --os-family=ubuntuNote: This applies to commit 5d31fc3 |
misteriaud
force-pushed
the
misteriaud/ASCII-2591-migrate-agent-ipc-clients-to-use-certificate
branch
from
a8db5c7 to
aeb003d
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
component/system-probe
team/agent-shared-components
long review
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| if cmdPort == "-1" { | ||
| return nil, errors.New("grpc client disabled via cmd_port: -1") | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // This is needed as the server hangs when using "grpc.WithInsecure()" | ||
| tlsConf := tls.Config{InsecureSkipVerify: true} | ||
| cred := credentials.NewTLS(&tls.Config{InsecureSkipVerify: true}) |
Check failure
Code scanning / CodeQL
Disabled TLS certificate check High
Show autofix suggestion
Hide autofix suggestion
Copilot Autofix AI 5 days ago
To fix the problem, we need to ensure that InsecureSkipVerify is not set to true in production code. Instead, we should use a proper TLS configuration that verifies the server's certificate. The best way to fix this is to remove the default setting of InsecureSkipVerify: true and rely on the tlsConfigGetter function to provide a valid TLS configuration.
- Remove the line that sets
InsecureSkipVerify: true. - Ensure that the
tlsConfigGetterfunction provides a valid TLS configuration.
| @@ -35,6 +35,4 @@ | ||
|
|
||
| cred := credentials.NewTLS(&tls.Config{InsecureSkipVerify: true}) | ||
| if tlsConfig := tlsConfigGetter(); !tlsConfig.InsecureSkipVerify { | ||
| cred = credentials.NewTLS(tlsConfig) | ||
| } | ||
| tlsConfig := tlsConfigGetter() | ||
| cred := credentials.NewTLS(tlsConfig) | ||
|
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 274cdd8 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.94 | [+0.89, +1.00] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.27 | [+0.19, +0.35] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.16 | [+0.03, +0.28] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.15 | [-0.31, +0.62] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.15 | [-0.63, +0.93] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.08 | [-0.60, +0.77] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.81, +0.89] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.77, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.64, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.79, +0.76] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.13, +0.10] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.85, +0.80] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.07 | [-0.85, +0.71] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -0.09 | [-3.32, +3.15] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.56 | [-0.60, -0.53] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 9/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
Explanation
Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%
Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:
- ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
- ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
- ➖ = no significant change in performance
A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".
For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
misteriaud
force-pushed
the
misteriaud/ASCII-2591-migrate-agent-ipc-clients-to-use-certificate
branch
from
633077d to
74ad773
Compare
…ud/ASCII-2591-migrate-agent-ipc-clients-to-use-certificate
Serverless Benchmark Results
tl;drUse these benchmarks as an insight tool during development.
What is this benchmarking?The The benchmark is run using a large variety of lambda request payloads. In the charts below, there is one row for each event payload type. How do I interpret these charts?The charts below comes from The benchstat docs explain how to interpret these charts.
I need more helpFirst off, do not worry if the benchmarks are failing. They are not tests. The intention is for them to be a tool for you to use during development. If you would like a hand interpreting the results come chat with us in Benchmark stats |
What does this PR do?
This PR enhances the two primary methods to access the Agent IPC Server by adding TLS certificate verification in:
pkg/api/utilpkg/util/grpcIt also updates the various locations where these IPC clients are used.
It follows the work done in these previous PRs:
Motivation
This PR is part of a plan to improve the security of the Agent's inter-process communication (IPC).
Describe how you validated your changes
Since the updated code is part of the backbone of the Agent IPC, a lot of test are indirectly covering the code modified in this PR.