git/github: default GitHub webhooks to TLS verification

[Vi-shub]

• Default GitHub repository webhooks created by pkg/git/github to insecure_ssl: "0" so GitHub verifies TLS when delivering to HTTPS payload URLs.
• Remove the prior insecure default ("1") and the associated TODO in CreateWebHook.

/kind bug

Fixes #3713

GitHub’s webhook insecure_ssl setting was hard-coded to "1", which disables TLS certificate verification for HTTPS webhook targets. The secure default is "0" for normal HTTPS endpoints. Users whose controller URL uses a certificate that GitHub does not trust (for example self-signed TLS in lab environments) may need a follow-up opt-in if hook creation or deliveries fail.

@davidhadas @lkingland can you please review this. Thanks for your time.

[knative-prow]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Vi-shub
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign dprotaso for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[linux-foundation-easycla]

• ❌ - login: @Vi-shub / name: Vi-shub. The commit (1e5ad39) is not authorized under a signed CLA. Please click here to be authorized. For further assistance with EasyCLA, please visit our EasyCLA portal and chat with our support bot.

[knative-prow]

Welcome @Vi-shub! It looks like this is your first PR to knative/func 🎉

[knative-prow]

Hi @Vi-shub. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a knative member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work.

Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 47 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 56.91%. Comparing base (c28a5dc) to head (1e5ad39).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/git/github/github.go	0.00%	47 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3714      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   56.18%   56.91%   +0.73%     
==========================================
  Files         181      181              
  Lines       20928    20929       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        11758    11912     +154     
+ Misses       8007     7809     -198     
- Partials     1163     1208      +45     

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	36.15% <0.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
e2e go	32.75% <0.00%> (?)
e2e node	28.48% <0.00%> (?)
e2e python	33.11% <0.00%> (?)
e2e quarkus	28.62% <0.00%> (?)
e2e rust	27.96% <0.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️
e2e springboot	26.52% <0.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
e2e typescript	28.59% <0.00%> (ø)
e2e-config-ci	17.88% <0.00%> (?)
integration	17.44% <0.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
unit macos-14	44.99% <0.00%> (ø)
unit macos-latest	44.99% <0.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
unit ubuntu-24.04-arm	45.16% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
unit ubuntu-latest	45.84% <0.00%> (ø)
unit windows-latest	44.97% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[matejvasek]

@lkingland @gauron99 do you recall why we would disable tls here? Tests maybe?

[davidhadas]

@Vi-shub welcome,
Why is the entire file show as different?
Are you replacing \n with \r\n or similar?
(If \r\n is the cause, I am surprised that we do not have a test for it)

Please recommit with one line changed.

As for the actual change - I see it was written like this 3 years ago (#1594) when first added and there is no comments about it in the PR besides the code comment. I suggest the func team review this and take a decision.