Else, a user would need to renew it first before being able to revoke
it, which does not make much sense..
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
this normally just means that the old cert is already expired, we do
not care for that - after all: we got a new (renewed) valid cert
successfully.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
otherwise the ACME endpoint might return the ordered domain in lower
case and we fail to find our plugin config.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
allow users with Sys.Modify to modify custom or ACME certificates. those
users can already hose the system in plenty of ways, no reason to
restrict this in particular to being root@pam only.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
As proxmox-acme has now a default delay for DNS challenge plugins,
which is the important one. Those are just for not overloading the
acme servers with a lot of requests, but once the challenge was
propagate they have it verified pretty quickly, so reduce delay for
checking validation after first requesting it down to 10 seconds
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
re-loading it always would mean that we could potentially switch the
config to something completely different, and the mix of the previous
and the old could result in total bogus actions.
Better to use the same one for one full order, even if it may get
"outdated" it was still valid in the past and most important
coherent.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
for now mostly due to the "nice" property of the acmedomains which
do not use their property key as index but actually the doamain.
Without this one could set up duplicated domain entries just fine,
but once using them -> error.
This is not nice UX, so verify node config before writing an updated
one out, to catch those issues.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
instead of relying that the authorization URLs and the ordered
identifiers are sorted the same way for already validated
authorizations.
on the contrary, RFC 8555 even says:
"The authorizations required are dictated by server policy; there may
not be a 1:1 relationship between the order identifiers and the
authorizations required."
authorizations MUST always include a single identifier, no matter which
state they are in.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
mixed bag of improvements:
- return hash based on domain
- check for duplicate domains, allow overlap between main and additional
keys otherwise
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
since letsencrypt updates their implementation to the ACMEv2 spec [1],
we should correctly parse the order status
1: https://community.letsencrypt.org/t/acmev2-order-ready-status/62866
note that we (for now) try to be compatbile to both versions,
with and without ready state, this can be changed when all letsencrypt
apis have changed
Signed-off-by: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com>
for creating/ordering a new certificate and renewing respectively
revoking an existing one.
Signed-off-by: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@proxmox.com>
