Files
home-network-k3s-impl/infra/gitea/README.md
T
jakman85andClaude Opus 5 ae5c7385a5 docs(gitea): the README still named the ILLEGAL secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN
PR #15 renamed the Actions secret to SETTINGS_API_TOKEN because Gitea RESERVES the
GITEA_ prefix and rejects such a name with HTTP 400 "invalid secret name" -- the
defect that left the branch-protection detector inert and unnoticed. The README in
this very directory, which documents that story, went on naming the illegal name in
its behaviour table and in its closing "remaining step" line.

Both now say SETTINGS_API_TOKEN, plus a note recording what ci/gitea-settings.sh
ACTUALLY does, quoted from the file rather than assumed:

    TOKEN="${SETTINGS_API_TOKEN:-${GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN:-}}"

GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN is still honoured, but ONLY as an environment variable for a
local run -- it can never be the CI wiring, because the secret that would feed it
cannot be created at all. The closing line also predated PR #15 storing the secret;
it now says so.

Documentation only. No behaviour change.

NOT fixed here, because it is outside this PR's diff: ci/gitea-settings.sh:45 still
instructs the reader to "create a Gitea repo secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN", which is
impossible. Same defect, different file -- worth its own one-line change.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
2026-09-29 22:47:55 -05:00

235 lines
13 KiB
Markdown

# infra/gitea — platform settings that are NOT GitOps-managed
Gitea's own repo settings (branch protection, required status checks, approvals) live
in Gitea's database, not in a manifest Flux reconciles. They are therefore **drift-prone
and invisible to the gate** — exactly how the state below went unnoticed.
## The gap this closes
Verified against the live API on 2026-09-29, against a `DECISIONS-LOG.md` entry
(2026-08-31) asserting the opposite:
| Claimed | Measured |
|---|---|
| `main` is a protected branch, gate is a required status check | `branch_protections` → `[]`; `protected:false`, `enable_status_check:false`, `required_approvals:0`, `user_can_push:true` |
| Runner `incluster-dind` online | **zero** runners registered at repo, org and site level |
So `main` accepted direct pushes, and the gate could not run at all. `CLAUDE.md` is the
rule; this directory is how the rule gets enforced by the machine.
## `branch-protection.sh`
Blocks direct pushes to `main`. Run it, then run the push probe it prints — **verify,
do not trust the API response**, since Gitea may let site admins bypass protection.
./infra/gitea/branch-protection.sh
It authenticates with the credential `git` already has stored for this host, and never
prints the secret.
## `runner-token-rotate.sh`
Mints a fresh instance-level registration token from the Gitea API and writes it into
`apps/wave-1/gitea-actions-runner-secret.sops.yaml` via `sops set`. **The token value is
never printed.**
./infra/gitea/runner-token-rotate.sh
A fresh token is usually **not sufficient on its own**. `act_runner` registers exactly once
and persists its identity in `/data/.runner` on the `act-runner-data` PVC. If Gitea no
longer holds a matching runner row, the pod starts, sees `.runner`, **skips registration**,
and polls with an identity Gitea does not recognise — so it never appears in the runner
list. That is precisely the observed symptom: zero runners, pod running, no error anyone
looks at. Clearing the PVC is what forces a real re-registration; the script prints the
commands.
## Sequence — DONE 2026-09-29
All four steps are complete and each was verified, not assumed:
| Step | State |
|---|---|
| 1. Runner registered | ✅ `incluster-dind` online. Root cause of its absence was a stale `/data/.runner` identity; clearing the PVC forced re-registration |
| 2. Gate observed green on a real PR | ✅ `gate / gate (pull_request)` ~1m35s |
| 3. `enable_status_check: true` | ✅ context `gate / gate (pull_request)` — that one ONLY |
| 4. Collaborator + approvals | ✅ `jakman85` is owner; `required_approvals: 1` |
Direct push to `main` was **provoked and rejected** (`pre-receive hook declined`) as
`gitea-admin`, a site admin — so push protection is not merely declared, it holds for the
account agents authenticate as.
### 5. Block the admin override — the step the first pass MISSED
`enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` were set on 2026-09-29 and **still did not
bite**, because `block_admin_merge_override` was `false`. Gitea lets repo admins override
merge requirements without it, and `jakman85` holds `owner` — so the two settings that looked
like the gate were overridable by precisely the account that merges.
**The evidence was sitting in plain sight:** PRs #5 through #9 all merged with
`required_approvals: 1` in force and **zero approvals recorded on any of them**. Checking the
*branch* view (`/branches/main`) hid this — it does not expose the field. Read the rule object
(`/branch_protections/main`) and enumerate its keys.
> **Do not probe for field names you assume exist.** This Gitea (1.24.3) has no
> `apply_to_admins`; asking `jq` for it returns `null`, which reads like "set to false" but
> means "key absent". Enumerate with `to_entries` and act on what is really there.
Now `block_admin_merge_override: true`. **That is still only a setting, not evidence** — it is
proven when a green PR is REFUSED a merge until approved, and not before.
### `require-gate.sh` / `verify-then-enforce.sh`
`verify-then-enforce.sh` is the re-runnable form of the whole safe order. It merges nothing —
merging is a human's reviewed act — but it forces the Flux reconcile and then **aborts** unless
the runner pod is healthy, a runner is online, and a real workflow goes green on it, before
enabling enforcement and probing the push. `require-gate.sh` is the enforcement step alone.
Re-run `verify-then-enforce.sh` after any future change to the act-runner Deployment.
### `expected-branch-protection.json` + `ci/gitea-settings.sh` — the detector
`expected-branch-protection.json` **declares** the desired rule. `ci/gitea-settings.sh` runs as
a merge-gate stage, reads the LIVE rule, and **fails the gate on any divergence** — plus asserts
at least one runner is online. It is the only thing in this repository that can see Gitea's own
database.
It reads `/branch_protections/main`, not `/branches/main`: the branch view does **not** expose
`block_admin_merge_override`, and it showed all-green for hours while the rule was overridable.
Behaviour, proven by test rather than assumed:
| Situation | Exit | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| live matches the declaration | 0 | green |
| any key drifted, or no runner online | 1 | **blocks the merge** |
| no `SETTINGS_API_TOKEN`, or Gitea unreachable | 3 | skips **loudly**; never a pass, never a block |
> **The secret is `SETTINGS_API_TOKEN`.** An earlier draft of this table named
> `GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN`, which **cannot exist as a Gitea secret at all** — Gitea reserves the
> `GITEA_` prefix and returns HTTP 400 `invalid secret name`. That is the whole 2026-09-29
> inert-detector story, so the wrong name surviving here is worth correcting rather than
> reading past. Measured in `ci/gitea-settings.sh`:
>
> TOKEN="${SETTINGS_API_TOKEN:-${GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN:-}}"
>
> so `GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN` is still honoured — but **only as an environment variable for a
> LOCAL run**. It can never be the CI wiring, because the secret that would feed it cannot be
> created. In CI, only `SETTINGS_API_TOKEN` exists.
The skip is deliberately *not* a block: an unwired credential blocking every PR is the
lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps hitting. Wire the token with `set-ci-token.sh`, confirm
the stage goes **green on a real PR**, and only then set `REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true` in
`gate.yml` so a future missing token blocks instead of skipping.
**Changing the declaration is how you change policy.** If the live state is what you now want,
edit this JSON in the same commit — deliberately, in review — rather than letting the two drift.
## `conformance-trigger-kubeconfig.sh` — the narrow L2/L3 trigger credential
Implements `docs/plans/l2-l3-conformance-ci-wiring.md` §3 item 6 (= §5 step 7): mint a
ServiceAccount token for `conformance/conformance-trigger`, wrap **only that token** in a
kubeconfig, store it as the Actions secret `CONFORMANCE_TRIGGER_KUBECONFIG`, and — separately,
and only on request — set `vars.CLUSTER_AVAILABLE=true`.
./infra/gitea/conformance-trigger-kubeconfig.sh --dry-run # measure only; writes nothing
./infra/gitea/conformance-trigger-kubeconfig.sh # mint + store the secret
./infra/gitea/conformance-trigger-kubeconfig.sh --arm-cluster-available # + the variable
Never a cluster-admin kubeconfig, never a copy of the operator's own. The token is never
printed: it goes from the TokenRequest API into a 0600 file, into the request **body file**
(`--data @file`, so not even into `ps`), and nowhere else. The script refuses to run under
`set -x`.
**Its preconditions are split in two, and the split is the point.**
| Class | Checks | Blocks |
|---|---|---|
| **mint-blocking** (cluster) | SA/Role/RoleBinding exist; ClusterPolicy `conformance-trigger-job-shape` is present, `Enforce`, `failurePolicy: Fail`, Ready | the **mint** — nothing is created |
| **arm-blocking** (repo) | digest-pinned `CONFORMANCE_RUNNER_IMAGE`; `chainsaw-job.yaml` has an init-container and the admitted image; `ci/conformance.sh` names the trigger kubeconfig in **code, not a comment** | only `CLUSTER_AVAILABLE` |
Why mint-blocking: Kubernetes puts **no `use` check on a Job's `serviceAccountName`**, so a
token that can `create jobs` in `conformance` can run arbitrary code as the privileged
`conformance-runner` SA. RBAC cannot close that; the Kyverno policy is the boundary. Minting
while it is absent or in `Audit` hands CI the privileged identity, so the script will not do it.
Why arm-blocking is separate: storing the secret before the runner image / Job template / CI
trigger flow exist is harmless (the job is gated off), and is the plan's intended order. So
running this today provisions the secret and then **refuses to arm the variable**, naming the
missing item.
**`CLUSTER_AVAILABLE` is not a "turn conformance on" switch.** Measured 2026-09-29: set with no
trigger path, `run.sh` scaffold-skipped all 54 tests at rc 0 and `ci/conformance.sh` printed
"L2/L3 conformance passed" — a fake green on an enforcing required check. `ci/conformance.sh`
now blocks that case, so arming early does not enable L2/L3; it only breaks every PR. Hence:
`--arm-cluster-available` plus all preconditions green plus a typed confirmation on a TTY, or
nothing happens.
Both writes are verified the way `set-ci-token.sh` learned to: check `%{http_code}` **and**
read the object back. For the secret that proves presence by name only (Gitea never returns
secret values); for the variable it proves the value is exactly `true`, which is what
`gate.yml` compares against.
The token **expires** — it is a TokenRequest token, and the script decodes the JWT `exp` claim
to report the real expiry rather than trusting `--duration` (the API server caps it). Re-run to
rotate. After expiry the trigger gets 401 and the stage fails loudly rather than skipping.
`--server` exists because the embedded API-server URL must be reachable **from the CI runner
pod** — the VIP — which is not necessarily the address your workstation uses. The script
refuses a loopback server outright.
### Why these scripts exist at all, and what is still missing
Gitea's repo settings live in **its own database**, not in anything Flux reconciles or the
conformance gate can read. Nothing detects drift from what this directory declares. That is
the root cause of the entire 2026-09-29 session: branch protection was off and the runner was
gone for a month while the log recorded both as working, and **no check existed that could
have caught it.**
These scripts encode the desired state and can re-assert it; `ci/gitea-settings.sh` above is the
**detector** that turns divergence from a silent, invisible failure into a loud one. It closes the
root cause of the 2026-09-29 session.
It is only as good as its wiring: **until `SETTINGS_API_TOKEN` exists it skips**, and a skipped
detector detects nothing. (That secret was stored and verified in PR #15; this sentence predates
it. The name matters — see the note under the behaviour table above.)
## Historical sequence (kept for context)
### Original ordering notes
1. **Get an Actions runner registered** — `runner-token-rotate.sh`, then clear the PVC so
the runner actually re-registers, then confirm it shows `online` in the API. Do not
skip the confirmation: the whole reason this went unnoticed is that a runner was
*recorded* as online without anyone checking.
2. **Watch the gate actually report on a real PR**, and note the context name it produced.
3. **Only then set `enable_status_check: true`** with that exact context.
4. Add the human reviewer as a repo collaborator, then raise `required_approvals` to 1.
> **Do not do step 3 before step 1.** A required status check with no runner leaves every
> PR permanently pending — including the PR that would fix it. That half is measured: PR #1
> sat `pending` for 30.6 minutes across 122 polls with no runner registered, and never
> reported.
### Measured, once the runner came up (2026-09-29)
The first CI jobs this repo ever ran, on PR #1 and PR #2:
| Context | Result | Time |
|---|---|---|
| `gate / gate (pull_request)` | success | 1m58s (PR #1), 1m34s (PR #2) |
| `gate / gate (push)` | success | 1m32s (PR #2 only) |
| `gate / conformance (pull_request)` | **success — "Has been skipped"** | — |
**Require `gate / gate (pull_request)`. Do NOT require either `conformance` context —
but not for the reason an earlier draft of this file gave.** A skipped Gitea Actions job
does not hang a status check: Gitea reports it as **`success`** with the description
"Has been skipped". So requiring it would not deadlock anything — it would pass
*vacuously*, every time, forever, while nothing ran. Under HARD RULE 4 that is worse than
a deadlock: a deadlock is loud, a permanently-green check that verifies nothing is
exactly the fail-open shape this repo keeps finding.
The `(push)` contexts appear only for branches matching `gate.yml`'s push trigger
(`feature/**`, `fix/**`, `docs/**`, `chore/**`). `feat/**` is **not** in that list, which
is why PR #1's `feat/` branch produced only `pull_request` contexts. Require only the
`pull_request` context, or PRs from non-matching prefixes will never satisfy the rule.