starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Data Sources | Git | Allow to select customized CA Cert file for HTTPS URLs #8724

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:40:22 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:40:22 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @teixemf on GitHub (Oct 6, 2023).

NetBox version

v3.5.8

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

The following proposal suggests an option to specify a CA Certificate for each Data Source when using Git HTTPS URLs.

Accessing Git repos over HTTPS requires server certificate validation.
When the Git server uses a self-signed certificate or a certificate signed by an Internal CA the Client must have those installed to validate the connection.

Currently, even with the proper certificates installed on the Client machine, Netbox Data Sources option is not able to validate the server Local Issuer Certificate.
We can see the following error log message on Netbox:

ERROR:root:Fetching remote data failed (MaxRetryError): HTTPSConnectionPool(host='somegitserver.example.com', port=443): Max retries exceeded with url: /my-git-repos/my-git-repo.git/info/refs?service=git-upload-pack (Caused by SSLError(SSLCertVerificationError(1, '[SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1007)')))

Thanks to the Discussion Unable to add self-hosted git repo as Data source #12774 I also found out that the dulwich Module used for Git interaction is not using certifi also - Drop use of certifi to find ca certificate path #1029 - so updating certifi with the proper custom certificates does not solve the problem.

As the Discussion points out, the problem could be solved by adding an option to specify a CA Certificate for each Data Source when using Git HTTPS URLs.
It could be an optional field located on the Data Source Backend Parameters near the other fields, Username,, Password and Branch. This field would accept a string with the path to the custom certificate and that path would be used to set the sslCAInfo option at the dulwich config context for that Data Source.

Use case

Following the Discussion Unable to add self-hosted git repo as Data source #12774 this feature will allow access to repos on Git servers whose certificate is self-signed or signed by an Internal CA.

Database changes

External dependencies

Originally created by @teixemf on GitHub (Oct 6, 2023). ### NetBox version v3.5.8 ### Feature type New functionality ### Proposed functionality The following proposal suggests an option to specify a CA Certificate for each Data Source when using Git HTTPS URLs. Accessing Git repos over HTTPS requires server certificate validation. When the Git server uses a self-signed certificate or a certificate signed by an Internal CA the Client must have those installed to validate the connection. Currently, even with the proper certificates installed on the Client machine, Netbox _Data Sources_ option is not able to validate the server Local Issuer Certificate. We can see the following error log message on Netbox: `ERROR:root:Fetching remote data failed (MaxRetryError): HTTPSConnectionPool(host='somegitserver.example.com', port=443): Max retries exceeded with url: /my-git-repos/my-git-repo.git/info/refs?service=git-upload-pack (Caused by SSLError(SSLCertVerificationError(1, '[SSL: CERTIFICATE_VERIFY_FAILED] certificate verify failed: unable to get local issuer certificate (_ssl.c:1007)')))` Thanks to the Discussion [Unable to add self-hosted git repo as Data source #12774](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/12774) I also found out that the _dulwich_ Module used for Git interaction is not using _certifi_ also - [Drop use of certifi to find ca certificate path #1029](https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/pull/1029) - so updating _certifi_ with the proper custom certificates does not solve the problem. As the Discussion points out, the problem could be solved by adding an option to specify a CA Certificate for each Data Source when using Git HTTPS URLs. It could be an optional field located on the Data Source _Backend Parameters_ near the other fields, Username,, Password and Branch. This field would accept a string with the path to the custom certificate and that path would be used to set the _sslCAInfo_ option at the _dulwich config context_ for that Data Source. ### Use case Following the Discussion [Unable to add self-hosted git repo as Data source #12774](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/discussions/12774) this feature will allow access to repos on Git servers whose certificate is self-signed or signed by an Internal CA. ### Database changes - ### External dependencies -
adam added the type: featurepending closure labels 2025-12-29 20:40:22 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:40:22 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:40:23 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@teixemf commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2023):

I already tested the solution by adding the following function right after the HTTP Proxy configuration on the function init_config located in the GitBackend Class located on the file core/data_backends.py
It works.

config.set("http", "sslCAInfo", "/path/to/my/custom/CA-Certificate.crt")

@teixemf commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2023): I already tested the solution by adding the following function right after the HTTP Proxy configuration on the function _init_config_ located in the _GitBackend_ Class located on the file _core/data_backends.py_ It works. `config.set("http", "sslCAInfo", "/path/to/my/custom/CA-Certificate.crt")`
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:40:23 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@teixemf commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2023):

I did the test with netbox-docker v3.5.8-2.6.1 when I first opened the Feature Proposal.
I later did a new test with netbox-docker v3.6.3-2.7.0 and I got a different result.

v3.5.8-2.6.1
It is not possible to get local issuer certificate even when my CA Root Certificate is installed on the system.

v3.6.3-2.7.0
It is possible to get local issuer certificate when my CA Root Certificate is installed on the system.

So the feature proposal doesn't apply if your CA Root Certificate is already installed on the system (which makes sense to be...)

Nevertheless, the feature proposal may still apply for servers with a self-signed certificate where the user will not or don't want to install the certificate on the system.

I will also propose adding the option do disable SSL verification with a disclaimer stating something like: "WARNING: Use it at your own risk!" - Although it is not recommended to disable SSL verification, it may be useful for testing purposes and since it will be disabled only in the context of a the Data Source where it is being configured, the risk is controlled.

If this Feature Proposal is accepted I can submit a PR.

@teixemf commented on GitHub (Oct 6, 2023): I did the test with netbox-docker v3.5.8-2.6.1 when I first opened the Feature Proposal. I later did a new test with netbox-docker v3.6.3-2.7.0 and I got a different result. **v3.5.8-2.6.1** It is **not possible** _to get local issuer certificate_ even when my CA Root Certificate is installed on the system. **v3.6.3-2.7.0** It is **possible** _to get local issuer certificate_ when my CA Root Certificate is installed on the system. So the feature proposal doesn't apply if your CA Root Certificate is already installed on the system (which makes sense to be...) Nevertheless, the feature proposal may still apply for servers with a self-signed certificate where the user will not or don't want to install the certificate on the system. I will also propose adding the option do disable SSL verification with a disclaimer stating something like: "WARNING: Use it at your own risk!" - Although it is not recommended to disable SSL verification, it may be useful for testing purposes and since it will be disabled only in the context of a the Data Source where it is being configured, the risk is controlled. If this Feature Proposal is accepted I can submit a PR.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:40:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jan 5, 2024):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jan 5, 2024): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. **Do not** attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:40:24 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Feb 5, 2024):

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Feb 5, 2024): This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label pending closure type: feature
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#8724
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?