Define a formal provider configuration catalogue for framework and crypto providers #14

Open
opened 2026-03-24 18:06:05 +01:00 by galambos · 0 comments
Owner

Provider classes such as BcX509CredentialFrameworkProvider currently expose no supported keys, and its allocation is intentionally minimal.

Why this matters

As the system grows toward profiles, ACME, remote signing, and approval workflows, provider configuration must become explicit, reviewable, and discoverable rather than implicit.

Acceptance criteria

  • Define configuration keys for framework providers, crypto workflow providers, and related components where needed.
  • Keep keys stable and documented.
  • Validate unknown/unsupported keys consistently.
  • Ensure the bootstrap logs only keys, not sensitive values.
Provider classes such as BcX509CredentialFrameworkProvider currently expose no supported keys, and its allocation is intentionally minimal. ## Why this matters As the system grows toward profiles, ACME, remote signing, and approval workflows, provider configuration must become explicit, reviewable, and discoverable rather than implicit. ## Acceptance criteria - Define configuration keys for framework providers, crypto workflow providers, and related components where needed. - Keep keys stable and documented. - Validate unknown/unsupported keys consistently. - Ensure the bootstrap logs only keys, not sensitive values.
galambos added this to the PKI Foundation Hardening and Regulated Operations Roadmap project 2026-03-24 18:56:06 +01:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Label
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Egothor/ZeroEcho#14