Skip to content

Proposal #129: Dual TLS certification and crypto agility#130

Open
ansasaki wants to merge 1 commit into
keylime:masterfrom
ansasaki:dual-certification
Open

Proposal #129: Dual TLS certification and crypto agility#130
ansasaki wants to merge 1 commit into
keylime:masterfrom
ansasaki:dual-certification

Conversation

@ansasaki
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This adds the proposal to add dual TLS certification and crypto agility support to all servers (verifier, registrar, and pull agent).

This adds the proposal to add dual TLS certification and crypto agility
support to all servers (verifier, registrar, and pull agent).

Signed-off-by: Anderson Toshiyuki Sasaki <ansasaki@redhat.com>
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented Mar 25, 2026

Important

Review skipped

Review was skipped due to path filters

⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
  • 129_dual-certification-crypto-agility.md is excluded by !**/*.md

CodeRabbit blocks several paths by default. You can override this behavior by explicitly including those paths in the path filters. For example, including **/dist/** will override the default block on the dist directory, by removing the pattern from both the lists.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 950e2168-aea9-446e-91c9-566f044bc493

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@@ -0,0 +1,652 @@
# enhancement-NNNN: Dual Certification and Crypto Agility
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should not this NNNN point to a real implementation number?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants