Turn the ClaimToken into a K8s Secret#68
Conversation
|
@mellena1 this is a good PR, and it's good to have more options. As an aside, if you are using gitops (I am too), take a look at the vault-secrets-operator which will persist secrets from a vault instance. I use this for the plex claim token in my setup, here: |
|
Hmm interesting. I'll have to check it out. I've been using the sealed-secrets project for a while now. I'll have to see if it's worth switching over. |
mellena1
changed the title
|
The claim is only good for 4 minutes. Why are you saving it anyway? I'm just curious, but it seems like this should be passed on the command line or in the call or whatever. |
|
|
||
| func generatePod(cwd string, env []string, args []string) *corev1.Pod { | ||
| envVars := toCoreV1EnvVar(env) | ||
| envVars = addFromSecretsToCoreV1EnvVar(envVars) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think these values need to be set on the transcoder pods as the transcoder doesn't have to authenticate with PMS, as far as I am aware? 🤔 perhaps I am wrong though! It's been a while...
|
|
||
| # Override this with the plex claim token from plex.tv/claim | ||
| claimToken: "" | ||
| claimToken: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In order to not break existing users, how about we leave this field as is, and add a new field:
# Configure the Plex 'claim token' (plex.tv/claim) using a manually created
# Secret resource stored in the cluster.
# Only one of 'claimToken' or 'claimTokenSecret' may be specified.
# 'claimToken' is deprecated in favour of 'claimTokenSecret' to avoid persisting
# sensitive information into Helm releases.
claimTokenSecret:
## Name of a Secret resource containing a Plex 'claim' token.
name: ""
## Key in the Secret resource of the claim token
key: "token"
| heritage: {{ .Release.Service }} | ||
| type: Opaque | ||
| data: | ||
| {{ .Values.claimToken.secretKey }}: {{ .Values.claimToken.value | b64enc | quote }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Once the config for this is split into claimToken and claimTokenSecret, can we change this Secret resource so that it does not use the secretKey or name field from the claimToken 'structure', and instead just hardcodes it (i.e. to the 'fullname' template, and then just some static 'key' for the Secret (specifically in the case where a user specifies claimToken and not claimTokenSecret).
| | `persistence.transcode.storageClass` | Type of persistent volume claim | `-` | | ||
| | `persistence.data.size` | Size of persistent volume claim | `40Gi` | | ||
| | `persistence.data.existingClaim`| Use an existing PVC to persist data | `nil` | | ||
| | `persistence.data.claimName`| Use an existing PVC to persist data | `nil` | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 didn't realise these are incorrect 👀
5 participants
Great chart/tool, thanks for making this!
I use a GitOps approach for my cluster deployments, and didn't want to commit the claimToken in plain text to a git repo. So I decided to break it out into a secret!
This PR will allow the end user to specify either the name of an existing secret or still pass the plain text version and the secret will be made for them.
Feel free to make any suggestions and I can make changes or you can make any necessary changes yourself.