luxolus
/
open-vault
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 1 Pull Requests Releases Activity

If we get a 405 doing an HTTP PATCH, assume the server is pre-1.9 and fall back to old readThenWrite approach (#13615)

This commit is contained in:
Nick Cabatoff 2022-01-11 11:52:24 -05:00 committed by GitHub
parent a5bfd500ca
commit 624128896f
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
2 changed files with 10 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

3
changelog/13615.txt Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
```release-note:bug
cli: Fix using kv patch with older server versions that don't support HTTP PATCH.
```

7
command/kv_patch.go
View File

@ -281,6 +281,13 @@ func (c *KVPatchCommand) mergePatch(client *api.Client, path string, newData map
secret, err := client.Logical().JSONMergePatch(context.Background(), path, data) secret, err := client.Logical().JSONMergePatch(context.Background(), path, data)
if err != nil { if err != nil {
// If it's a 405, that probably means the server is running a pre-1.9
// Vault version that doesn't support the HTTP PATCH method.
// Fall back to the old way of doing it if the user didn't specify a -method.
// If they did, and it was "patch", then just error.
if re, ok := err.(*api.ResponseError); ok && re.StatusCode == 405 && rwFallback {
return c.readThenWrite(client, path, newData)
}
// If it's a 403, that probably means they don't have the patch capability in their policy. Fall back to // If it's a 403, that probably means they don't have the patch capability in their policy. Fall back to
// the old way of doing it if the user didn't specify a -method. If they did, and it was "patch", then just error. // the old way of doing it if the user didn't specify a -method. If they did, and it was "patch", then just error.
if re, ok := err.(*api.ResponseError); ok && re.StatusCode == 403 && rwFallback { if re, ok := err.(*api.ResponseError); ok && re.StatusCode == 403 && rwFallback {