Refactoring token expiry check #150
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…t's probably a better idea to always check for token expiry as a default behaviour
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We had introduced additional abstract class to add token expiry awareness in last release. This made it 3 levels of abstract classes.
After looking into it closely, I think probably it's a good idea to make token expiry aware a default behaviour - as this is useful in all the cases except plain token based secret.
About duplication of token expiry checking logic in JCasC and Credentials - I think this needs a bigger refactoring. We should extract Vault Authentication mechanism in a common place and it should be used by both credentials and JCasC secrets code.