Ask for the new passphrase in unlocker add when the variable is set (closes #154)
check / check (push) Waiting to run

With SB_UNLOCK_PASSPHRASE set, `secret unlocker add passphrase` gave the
new unlocker the passphrase in the variable without asking. It now asks
on the terminal for the new passphrase and uses the variable to unlock
the vault. With no controlling terminal the new unlocker takes the
variable's passphrase, and the output says so.

secret.ErrNoTerminal is exported so that the command can tell a missing
terminal from other failures to read, such as nothing typed or a
mismatched confirmation, which still fail the command.

The in-process tests that add a passphrase unlocker with the variable
set rely on the Docker test phase having no controlling terminal; at a
terminal they would ask.

Model: opus-5-5
This commit was merged in pull request #175.
This commit is contained in:
2026-10-15 06:02:31 +02:00
parent 5922de32df
commit 67c2829f58
4 changed files with 173 additions and 11 deletions
+6
View File
@@ -271,6 +271,12 @@ Creates a new unlocker of the specified type:
A vault has one passphrase unlocker: adding one replaces the one the vault has,
which is removed only once the new one is the current unlocker.
`secret unlocker add passphrase` asks on the terminal for the new passphrase
even when `SB_UNLOCK_PASSPHRASE` is set, and uses the variable to unlock the
vault. With no controlling terminal, as under cron or in a CI job, the new
unlocker takes its passphrase from `SB_UNLOCK_PASSPHRASE`, and the command says
so.
#### `secret unlocker remove <unlocker-id> [--force]` / `secret unlocker rm` ⚠️ 🛑
**DANGER**: Permanently removes an unlocker. It first asks for confirmation,