-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
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
feat: basic protection boot endpoint #334
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #334 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 93.06% 93.86% +0.79%
==========================================
Files 36 36
Lines 7121 8147 +1026
==========================================
+ Hits 6627 7647 +1020
- Misses 494 500 +6 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
lgtm
8610df9
to
fe75188
Compare
* feat: basic protection boot endpoint * rename env variable to indicate experimental status * update with more test cases * add command line flags for boot protection
* feat: basic protection boot endpoint * rename env variable to indicate experimental status * update with more test cases * add command line flags for boot protection
* feat: basic protection boot endpoint * rename env variable to indicate experimental status * update with more test cases * add command line flags for boot protection
This PR implements a basic protection of the boot endpoint, this enables you to more easily deploy test instances publicly. This way you can add the authorization to the URL. See rationale in #327
Closes #327
If we also land #333, I will rebase this on top and also expose this feature as command line flags.
I also thought this could be implemented as a falcon middleware. But wanted to get feedback first whether or not it should be included at all.