Closed squat closed 7 years ago
LGTM
What is the provider name for on-prem installations? How do we know that is not PII ?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Lucas Servén notifications@github.com wrote:
This commit modifies the Node struct and adds a new field CloudProvider. This value is determined by taking the
portion of the ProviderID reported in the node spec. Making this change will require updating the database schema. The cloud provider name is not PII and will provide useful insight into how people are using Kubernetes. Addresses: #14 https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/issues/14
You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at:
https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15 Commit Summary
- report: add cloud provider name to report
File Changes
- M pkg/report/record.go https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15/files#diff-0 (3)
- M pkg/volunteer/kubernetes.go https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15/files#diff-1 (14)
Patch Links:
- https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15.patch
- https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15.diff
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVKLzHDHdQghuogR9-OHvcK1Dokbmks5rEHvfgaJpZM4LC8ep .
@thockin hrm, good point, maybe we whitelist the 7 well-known existing cloud implementations?
or hash it and just depend on some cloudproviders having well-known hashes?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Brandon Philips notifications@github.com wrote:
@thockin https://github.com/thockin hrm, good point, maybe we whitelist the 7 well-known existing cloud implementations?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264571253, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVKldVBbaPuN1GxLvi5QhrcARfmDLks5rEJHOgaJpZM4LC8ep .
We need to be SUPER DUPER EXTRA CAUTIOUS about PII. Please please please.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Tim Hockin thockin@google.com wrote:
or hash it and just depend on some cloudproviders having well-known hashes?
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Brandon Philips notifications@github.com wrote:
@thockin https://github.com/thockin hrm, good point, maybe we whitelist the 7 well-known existing cloud implementations?
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264571253, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVKldVBbaPuN1GxLvi5QhrcARfmDLks5rEJHOgaJpZM4LC8ep .
@thockin totally agree on being cautious. I hadn't even thought that someone might fork and create their own cloud provider.
I feel a static whitelist and saying "unknown" if it isn't int he whitelist is the least risk PII leak situation.
But eventually cloudproviders will be out-of-tree so a whitelist is a dead-end
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Brandon Philips notifications@github.com wrote:
@thockin https://github.com/thockin totally agree on being cautious. I hadn't even thought that someone might fork and create their own cloud provider.
I feel a static whitelist and saying "unknown" if it isn't int he whitelist is the least risk PII leak situation.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264602648, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVPP7UyOGQOwXUe7coIaMG_NM54cpks5rEMClgaJpZM4LC8ep .
@thockin well, with a whitelist we can put in the README exactly what we collect and don't. With a hash it only takes someone leaking the name of their private cloud provider once on some mailing list to unlock all of the old spartakus data.
fair enough. I can live with a whitelist, and an occasional PR to add items to it.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Brandon Philips notifications@github.com wrote:
@thockin https://github.com/thockin well, with a whitelist we can put in the README exactly what we collect and don't. With a hash it only takes someone leaking the name of their private cloud provider once on same mailing list to unlock all of the old spartakus data.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264607086, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVOOGh3Jze8LzhQRsaybd_4ewfXJIks5rEMvdgaJpZM4LC8ep .
Sounds good. I'll update the PR to use a whitelist 👍
On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 10:22 PM Tim Hockin notifications@github.com wrote:
fair enough. I can live with a whitelist, and an occasional PR to add items to it.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Brandon Philips notifications@github.com wrote:
@thockin https://github.com/thockin well, with a whitelist we can put in the README exactly what we collect and don't. With a hash it only takes someone leaking the name of their private cloud provider once on same mailing list to unlock all of the old spartakus data.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264607086 , or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVOOGh3Jze8LzhQRsaybd_4ewfXJIks5rEMvdgaJpZM4LC8ep
.
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264687049, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATiQP26X3wYpEBLt0Endwcyos25rYkEcks5rElwvgaJpZM4LC8ep .
please ping me on it so I can update the DB schema.
On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Lucas Servén notifications@github.com wrote:
Sounds good. I'll update the PR to use a whitelist 👍
On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 10:22 PM Tim Hockin notifications@github.com wrote:
fair enough. I can live with a whitelist, and an occasional PR to add items to it.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Brandon Philips < notifications@github.com> wrote:
@thockin https://github.com/thockin well, with a whitelist we can put in the README exactly what we collect and don't. With a hash it only takes someone leaking the name of their private cloud provider once on same mailing list to unlock all of the old spartakus data.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15# issuecomment-264607086 , or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe- auth/AFVgVOOGh3Jze8LzhQRsaybd_4ewfXJIks5rEMvdgaJpZM4LC8ep
.
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15# issuecomment-264687049, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ ATiQP26X3wYpEBLt0Endwcyos25rYkEcks5rElwvgaJpZM4LC8ep .
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/kubernetes-incubator/spartakus/pull/15#issuecomment-264687689, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFVgVD5Nfq4PdsmvQVTp-ckuWPEk93Q9ks5rEmDKgaJpZM4LC8ep .
This commit modifies the Node struct and adds a new field
CloudProvider
. This value is determined by taking the<ProviderName>
portion of theProviderID
reported in the node spec. Making this change will require updating the database schema. The cloud provider name is not PII and will provide useful insight into how people are using Kubernetes.Addresses: #14