Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Return usable URL from remoteapprest app start #568
Return usable URL from remoteapprest app start #568
Changes from 7 commits
efac6e2
5c2b79e
e1f5363
4c91d5a
c09a8e0
2f7bc26
1198470
c90c28c
c163030
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am wondering if there are either any security or practical implications of this change, since the container url ID is no longer a random or unique string.
Are there any best practices for Docker container url ids? I couldn't find much information online. Maybe we can just review any potential information that we are exposing here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree, however I don't think we're exposing any sensible data, being it simply the name of the image. Also, it shouldn't pose a problem practically (e.g. name conflicts with other containers), since we run only one container (for a given image) at a time.
I haven't found anything specific about container IDs, so I wouldn't know about best practices, I'm afraid.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, that makes sense.
To tidy things up, could we extend the
_generate_container_url_id
to take aimage_name
keyword argument that isNone
by default? If theimage_name
is then provided, then we parse it, if not we just return a random string.