wordpress VS mkcert

#!/bin/sh set -euo pipefail # Based on wordpress:cli entrypoint # https://github.com/docker-library/wordpress/blob/master/php7.2/cli/docker-entrypoint.sh # If the first arg is `--some-option` then execute wp-cli if [ "${1#-}" != "$1" ]; then set -- wp "$@" fi # if our command is a valid wp-cli subcommand (say plugin), let's invoke it through wp-cli instead # (this allows for "docker run wordpress:cli help", etc) # documenation of the subcommand is shown if wp --path=/dev/null help "$1" > /dev/null 2>&1; then set -- wp "$@" fi # Execute aliases in the make file or directly the provided command if [ "$1" == "install" ] || [ "$1" == "configure" ]; then make -f /scripts/Makefile $1 else exec "$@" fi

You can take a look at the dockerfile here for educational purposes and you can see apache is not configured to listen on 443 at all. And if you read the "How to use this image" section on the docker hub page for wordpress you can see that they suggest you to set up TLS using a reverse proxy like nginx and there are some additional things to set up.

In the entrypoint script for Wordpress (link here), if a folder already has content, nothing new gets written in. I'm not 100% sure that this would work, but you could try:

Additional note, look an the official WordPress dockerfile. https://github.com/docker-library/wordpress/blob/97f75b51f909fbd9894d128ea6893120cfd23979/latest/php7.4/apache/Dockerfile At the bottom you are a entrypoint and a CMD. I believe it runs "$entrypoint $CMD" when started with no arguments. Your can charge these, or best to leave alone. You just need to docker run your new built container.

Which one is it here: https://github.com/docker-library/wordpress/tree/master/latest

https://github.com/docker-library/wordpress/blob/master/docker-entrypoint.sh#L71

wordpress | WARNING: environment variable "WORDPRESS_CONFIG_EXTRA" is set, but "wp-config.php" already exists wordpress | The contents of this variable will _not_ be inserted into the existing "wp-config.php" file. wordpress | (see https://github.com/docker-library/wordpress/issues/333 for more details) w ```

WordPress already provides a docker image which can be used for development, but it has a few problems that are not dealt with in the usual docker way. We never really found a configurable solution to these problems, which always meant using the docker image requiring some repeated “must know” steps for everything the containers need to be built. Or reverting to using developer machines local php/apache/mysql or another dev environment tool.

The experimental HTTPS flag relies on mkcert, designed for a single development system. If you run a Docker container, the flag won’t configure your local browser to trust its certificate.

The author mentions difficulties with HTTPS and trying stuff locally.

I've had some success with mkcert [1] to easily create certificates trusted by browsers, I can suggest to look into this. You are your own root CA, I think it can work without an internet connection.

[1] https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert/

Solution: mkcert – Your Zero-Configuration HTTPS Enabler Meet mkcert, a user-friendly, zero-configuration tool designed for creating locally-trusted development certificates. Find it on its GitHub page and follow the instructions tailored for your operating system. For Mac users employing Homebrew, simply execute the following commands in your terminal:

Well, Certifi does not ship with your company's certificates! So requesting internal services may come with additional painful extra steps! Also for a local development environment that uses mkcert for example!

My project, getlocalcert.net[1] may be the one you're thinking of.

Since I'm also building in this space, I'll give my perspective. Local certificate generation is complicated. If you spend the time, you can figure it out, but it's begging for a simpler solution. You can use tools like mkcert[2] for anything that's local to your machine. However, if you're already using ACME in production, maybe you'd prefer to use ACME locally? I think that's what Anchor offers, a unified approach.

There's a couple references in the Anchor blog about solving the distribution problem by building better tooling[3]. I'm eager to learn more, that's a tough nut to crack. My theory for getlocalcert is that the distribution problem is too difficult (for me) to solve, so I layer the tool on top of Let's Encrypt certificates instead. The end result for both tools is a trusted TLS certificate issued via ACME automation.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36674224

2. https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert

3. https://blog.anchor.dev/the-acme-gap-introducing-anchor-part...

Looks like step-ca/step-cli [1] and mkcert [2] have been mentioned. Another related tool is XCA [3] - a gui tool to manage CAs and server/client TLS certificates. It takes off some of the tedium in using openssl cli directly. It also stores the certs and keys in an encrypted database. It doesn't solve the problem of getting the root CA certificate into the system store or of hosting the revocation list. I use XCA to create and store the root CA. Intermediate CAs signed with it are passed to other issuers like vault and step-issuer.

[1] https://smallstep.com/docs/step-ca/

[2] https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert

[3] https://hohnstaedt.de/xca/

We use mkcert for this, it works wonderfully.

https://github.com/FiloSottile/mkcert