I’m trying to script setup and configuration of caddy server based on a custom download that includes additional plugins (caddy-auth-portal, caddy-auth-jwt, caddy-trace, and various caddy-dns modules ).

During setup, the caddy unit file is configured to run caddy as a non priveledged user (by design).

To get certificates configured properly we are attempting to use the caddy trust command

Just for RSA. Do encrypt and decrypt. Include a bold comment that this should not be used for bulk encryption.

It should be the current best practice (fetch), have proper error handling and resource allocation/deallocation and be in the style of a known answer test.

Right now in different places in the SE codebase there are references to /opt and then as well to /usr.

All SE code should reference one place only. Could someone please create a PR that fixes this.

This PR should also take PR #454 into consideration (no conflicts)

It could be useful to allow for controller's sync period to be configurable.

Background:
See Kubernetes sample controller diagram for reference. cert-manager's controller consists of a number of control loops that sync various cert-manager's and Ku

There's little information about what keys and values are in the output, what it means and how they are related to the screen output. In general that needs to be added. (special topics see #1675, #1674)

Problem:

A common pattern is:

GUARD(s2n_stuffer_skip_write(stuffer, bytes_to_write));
uint8_t* ptr = suffer->blob.data + stuffer->write_cursor - bytes_to_write;

which could be simplified.

Solution:

*ptr could be an *out parameter to s2n_stuffer_skip_write

• Does this change what S2N sends over the wire? No.
• Does this change any public APIs? No.

What would you like to be added

Add support for a DynamoDB storage backend. Although MySQL is available, it would require to run a RDS Instance for it. Extra costs, backup considerations, etc. Even with Aurora Serverless.

DynamoDB is just there, scales as needed with OnDemand pricing and has fine backup capabilities.

Why this is needed

We plan to run step-ca in AWS ECS on Farga

This option is a trade-off between a feature a code size: it allows people who don't need that feature to avoid paying the cost in code size, by disabling it.

However:

• the code size savings are not that significant
• in the future we can design a mechanism for that an other ssl_config options that will save more code size and be more uniform, see #3535 "Hardcoding of SSL options"

Wor