Skip to content

Limit parallelism of forced key ring refreshes #54627

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

amcasey
Copy link
Member

@amcasey amcasey commented Mar 19, 2024

During the auto-refresh window, an Unprotect call with an unknown key ID is allowed to bypass the cache and perform a fresh read of the key ring (#11987). While, in principle, "force" means that it must happen every time, in practice, it doesn't make sense to block until an ongoing refresh is finished and then immediately perform another one. Instead, wait for the in-progress refresh to complete and return the same value (or throw, as appropriate).

Preserving the precise exception from the thread that actually does the refresh didn't seem important, so I didn't bother (for now).

During the auto-refresh window, an `Unprotect` call with an unknown key ID is allowed to bypass the cache and perform a fresh read of the key ring (dotnet#11987).  While, in principle, "force" means that it must happen every time, in practice, it doesn't make sense to block until an ongoing refresh is finished and then immediately perform another one.  Instead, wait for the in-progress refresh to complete and return the same value (or throw, as appropriate).

Preserving the precise exception from the thread that actually does the refresh didn't seem important, so I didn't bother (for now).
@ghost ghost added the area-dataprotection Includes: DataProtection label Mar 19, 2024
@amcasey amcasey marked this pull request as draft March 20, 2024 22:58
@amcasey
Copy link
Member Author

amcasey commented Mar 20, 2024

I'd like to discuss this change in isolation, but I actually have a different implementation in mind.

@amcasey
Copy link
Member Author

amcasey commented Mar 21, 2024

The real change is #54675.

@amcasey amcasey requested a review from captainsafia March 23, 2024 01:05
@amcasey amcasey closed this May 2, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service dotnet-policy-service bot added this to the 9.0-preview5 milestone May 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area-dataprotection Includes: DataProtection
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant