psa-systems/mokosh-server
Watch
9
0
Fork
You've already forked mokosh-server
 1
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases 10 Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs(webhook): describe BUNYIP_WEBHOOK_SECRET as service-wide, not per-Application #424

Merged
YousifShkara merged 2 commits from docs/BUNYIP-332-correct-webhook-secret-comment into main 2026-07-03 12:38:03 +02:00
Conversation 0 Commits 2 Files changed 1 +12 -6
YousifShkara commented 2026-07-03 11:21:15 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Bunyip does not have a webhook_secret column on its applications model. Every outbound webhook - account_deleted, maintenance_change, active_change - is signed by a single service-wide HMAC-SHA256 secret held by bunyip-api's WebhookService::new(signing_secret). Prior comments here described this as "the same per-app registry row in Bunyip's applications table", which sent an operator or triaging engineer looking for a row that does not exist.

Correct the two related comments (the AppConfig field doc and the resolve_secret call site) to describe the actual shape and point at bunyip-api's BUNYIP_WEBHOOK_SIGNING_SECRET (BUNYIP-332), which is the env var that holds the matching value on the sending side. Comment-only; no behavior change.

#BUNYIP-332

Bunyip does not have a `webhook_secret` column on its `applications` model. Every outbound webhook - account_deleted, maintenance_change, active_change - is signed by a single service-wide HMAC-SHA256 secret held by bunyip-api's `WebhookService::new(signing_secret)`. Prior comments here described this as "the same per-app registry row in Bunyip's applications table", which sent an operator or triaging engineer looking for a row that does not exist. Correct the two related comments (the AppConfig field doc and the resolve_secret call site) to describe the actual shape and point at bunyip-api's `BUNYIP_WEBHOOK_SIGNING_SECRET` (BUNYIP-332), which is the env var that holds the matching value on the sending side. Comment-only; no behavior change. #BUNYIP-332
YousifShkara force-pushed docs/BUNYIP-332-correct-webhook-secret-comment from 77adaae83b
Some checks failed
Check / fmt + clippy + build + tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m54s
Details
Integration / integration tests (pull_request) Successful in 13m54s
Details
E2E / Playwright against staging (pull_request) Failing after 2m34s
Details
to 6a8037a23d
All checks were successful
E2E / Playwright against staging (pull_request) Successful in 27s
Details
Check / fmt + clippy + build + tests (pull_request) Successful in 1m36s
Details
Integration / integration tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m59s
Details
2026-07-03 12:16:50 +02:00 Compare
ci: retrigger against rebased tip (post-BUNYIP-331 e2e fix)
All checks were successful
E2E / Playwright against staging (pull_request) Successful in 26s
Details
Check / fmt + clippy + build + tests (pull_request) Successful in 1m22s
Details
Integration / integration tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m23s
Details
Create release / Gate (release-branch merges only) (pull_request) Successful in 0s
Details
Create release / Create release from merged PR (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
629c4e79b4
YousifShkara deleted branch docs/BUNYIP-332-correct-webhook-secret-comment 2026-07-03 12:38:03 +02:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels
No items
No labels
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
YousifShkara
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference
psa-systems/mokosh-server!424
No description provided.