After the open-question walkthrough, all four collapsed:
- Q1 (mount semantics): resolved to `docker cp` between
`docker create` and `docker start`, mirroring the existing
pipelock YAML handling. No bind mount, no UID/permission
concern. Folded into §Proposed Design > CA lifecycle as
"Sidecar install".
- Q2 (cert validity / TTL): pre-decided in the question text.
Per-bottle ephemerality is enforced by regenerating per launch,
not by short validity windows. Pipelock's defaults are fine.
Folded into §Proposed Design as a one-line "Per-bottle
ephemerality" note.
- Q3 (`passthrough_domains` shape): not v1 scope; the shape is
pre-recorded so the follow-up is mechanical. Moved into
§Out of scope.
- Q4 (stage-dir cleanup ordering): reading start.py confirmed
the ExitStack-then-outer-finally order is correct. Folded into
§Proposed Design as a "Teardown" note.
The §Open questions section is dropped. None of the four was a
real design question — they were verifications and pre-decided
items left in for defensiveness.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Supersedes the abandoned PR #8 (`mitmproxy-tls-interception`),
which built a mitmproxy + addon chain on the (falsified) premise
that pipelock could not MITM. Empirical proof from the impl-time
spike: with `tls_interception: { enabled: true, ca_cert, ca_key }`
in pipelock's config, pipelock answered a credential POST over
HTTPS with `STATUS=403 / body: blocked: request body contains
secret: GitHub Token` and emitted both `scanner:"tls_intercept"`
and `scanner:"body_dlp"` events. Standalone, no second proxy.
Net change vs PR #8: one sidecar instead of two, no vendored
addon, no addon-verdict pattern matching, no HTTPS-trust /
DNS / lookup workarounds. Same end-state behavior — pipelock's
DLP fires on plaintext for HTTPS hosts in the allowlist.
Also cleaning up the now-stale TLS-research notes:
- `docs/research/tls-mitm-for-pipelock.md` is removed. Its
entire premise (mitmproxy in front of pipelock) is moot now
that pipelock does the work natively. The mechanics of CONNECT
bumping and the CA-lifecycle considerations it documented are
the same as what pipelock implements; the PRD restates the
parts that matter for the integration.
- `docs/research/pipelock-assessment.md` had two stale claims
corrected: the "Pipelock does not perform TLS inspection (no
CA trust injection)" line in §Scope gaps and the
"no TLS termination" cell in the comparison table. Both now
point at the `tls_interception` config and `pipelock tls`
CLI instead.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
didericis