## What
This adds openapi documentation for the Auth tagged operations and
connected schemas.
## Discussion points
Our user schema seems to be exposing quite a bit of internal fields, I
flagged the isApi field as deprecated, I can imagine quite a few of
these fields also being deprecated to prepare for removal in next major
version, but I was unsure which ones were safe to do so with.
## Observation
We have some technical debt around the shape of the schema we're
claiming we're returning and what we actually are returning. I believe
@gastonfournier also observed this when we turned on validation for our
endpoints.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
Adds a UI that shows current status of version and feature usage
collection configuration, and a presence in the configuration menu +
menu bar.
Configuring these features is done by setting environment variables. The
version info collection is an existing feature that we're making more
visible, the feature usage collection feature is a new feature that has
it's own environment configuration but also depends on version info
collection being active to work.
When version collection is turned off and the experimental feature flag
for feature usage collection is turned off:
<img width="1269" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/435a07da-d238-4b5b-a150-07e3bd6b816f">
When version collection is turned on and the experimental feature flag
is off:
<img width="1249" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/8d1a76c5-99c9-4551-9a4f-86d477bbbf6f">
When the experimental feature flag is enabled, and version+telemetry is
turned off:
<img width="1239" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/e0bc532b-be94-4076-bee1-faef9bc48a5b">
When version collection is turned on, the experimental feature flag is
enabled, and telemetry collection is turned off:
<img width="1234" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/1bd190c1-08fe-4402-bde3-56f863a33289">
When version collection is turned on, the experimental feature flag is
enabled, and telemetry collection is turned on:
<img width="1229" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/848912cd-30bd-43cf-9b81-c58a4cbad1e4">
When version collection is turned off, the experimental feature flag is
enabled, and telemetry collection is turned on:
<img width="1241" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/707867/d2b981f2-033f-4fae-a115-f93e0653729b">
---------
Co-authored-by: sighphyre <liquidwicked64@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
### What
Added documentation for context fields and endpoints tagged with the
"Context" tag.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
This PR adds strategy titles as an optional bit of data added to client
features. It's only added when prompted.
## Discussion points:
### getPlaygroundFeatures
The optional `includeStrategyId` parameter has been replaced by a
`getPlaygroundFeatures` in the service (and in the underlying store).
The playground was the only place that used this specific include, so
instead of adding more and making the interface for that method more
complex, I created a new method that deals specifically with the
playground.
The underlying store still uses an `optionalIncludes` parameter,
however. I have a plan to make that interface more fluid, but I'd like
to propose that in a follow-up PR.
## About the changes
`getUserRootRoles` should also consider custom root roles
This introduces test cases that unveiled a dependency between stores
(this happens actually at the DB layer having access-service access
tables from two different stores but skipping the store layer).
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1161/a-user-with-custom-root-role-and-permission-to-create-client-api
---------
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
This PR changes the OpenAPI schema for the advanced playground to not
accept empty lists of environments and to not accept environment names
that don't match the env name pattern we use.
The pattern is the same as the one we use for controlling environment
names on creation.
However, there is a (small) chance that these may get out of sync later,
so we could do something to only define this pattern once (and import it
in the enterprise package), but that may be more work than is necessary,
and I'd suggest we do that later.
I've also added a minLength to the string items although it isn't
strictly necessary. It's primarily to give the users better feedback if
the name is empty.
This change adds an "edit" link to all playground strategies when they
are returned from the API, allowing the user to jump directly to the
evaluated strategy edit screen.
This change applies to both old and new strategies, so it should even
work in the old playground.
This does not use this information in the frontend yet.
## Discussion points:
Should "links" be an object or a singular string? I know the
notifications service uses just "link", but using an object will make
it easier to potentially add more actions in the future (such as
"enable"/"disable", maybe?)
Do we need to supply basePath? I noticed that the notifications links
only ever use an empty string for base path, so it might not be
necessary and can potentially be left out.
## Changes
I've implemented the link building in a new view model file. Inspecting
the output after the result is fully ready requires some gnarly
introspection and mapping, but it's tested.
Further, I've done a little bit of work to stop the playground service
using the schema types directly as the schema types now contain extra
information.
This PR also updates the `urlFriendlyString` arbitrary to not produce
strings that contain only periods. This causes issues when parsing URLs
(and is also something we struggle with in the UI).
## What
As part of the move to enable custom-root-roles, our permissions model
was found to not be granular enough to allow service accounts to only be
allowed to create read-only tokens (client, frontend), but not be
allowed to create admin tokens to avoid opening up a path for privilege
escalation.
## How
This PR adds 12 new roles, a CRUD set for each of the three token types
(admin, client, frontend). To access the `/api/admin/api-tokens`
endpoints you will still need the existing permission (CREATE_API_TOKEN,
DELETE_API_TOKEN, READ_API_TOKEN, UPDATE_API_TOKEN). Once this PR has
been merged the token type you're modifying will also be checked, so if
you're trying to create a CLIENT api-token, you will need
`CREATE_API_TOKEN` and `CREATE_CLIENT_API_TOKEN` permissions. If the
user performing the create call does not have these two permissions or
the `ADMIN` permission, the creation will be rejected with a `403 -
FORBIDDEN` status.
### Discussion points
The test suite tests all operations using a token with
operation_CLIENT_API_TOKEN permission and verifies that it fails trying
to do any of the operations against FRONTEND and ADMIN tokens. During
development the operation_FRONTEND_API_TOKEN and
operation_ADMIN_API_TOKEN permission has also been tested in the same
way. I wonder if it's worth it to re-add these tests in order to verify
that the permission checker works for all operations, or if this is
enough. Since we're running them using e2e tests, I've removed them for
now, to avoid hogging too much processing time.
This change adds a little more detail to the client metrics schema. The
description for variants felt a
little unclear.
---------
Co-authored-by: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
Implements custom root roles, encompassing a lot of different areas of
the project, and slightly refactoring the current roles logic. It
includes quite a clean up.
This feature itself is behind a flag: `customRootRoles`
This feature covers root roles in:
- Users;
- Service Accounts;
- Groups;
Apologies in advance. I may have gotten a bit carried away 🙈
### Roles
We now have a new admin tab called "Roles" where we can see all root
roles and manage custom ones. We are not allowed to edit or remove
*predefined* roles.
This meant slightly pushing away the existing roles to `project-roles`
instead. One idea we want to explore in the future is to unify both
types of roles in the UI instead of having 2 separate tabs. This
includes modernizing project roles to fit more into our current design
and decisions.
Hovering the permissions cell expands detailed information about the
role:
### Create and edit role
Here's how the role form looks like (create / edit):
Here I categorized permissions so it's easier to visualize and manage
from a UX perspective.
I'm using the same endpoint as before. I tried to unify the logic and
get rid of the `projectRole` specific hooks. What distinguishes custom
root roles from custom project roles is the extra `root-custom` type we
see on the payload. By default we assume `custom` (custom project role)
instead, which should help in terms of backwards compatibility.
### Delete role
When we delete a custom role we try to help the end user make an
informed decision by listing all the entities which currently use this
custom root role:
~~As mentioned in the screenshot, when deleting a custom role, we demote
all entities associated with it to the predefined `Viewer` role.~~
**EDIT**: Apparently we currently block this from the API
(access-service deleteRole) with a message:
What should the correct behavior be?
### Role selector
I added a new easy-to-use role selector component that is present in:
- Users
- Service Accounts
- Groups
### Role description
I also added a new role description component that you can see below the
dropdown in the selector component, but it's also used to better
describe each role in the respective tables:
I'm not listing all the permissions of predefined roles. Those simply
show the description in the tooltip:
### Role badge
Groups is a bit different, since it uses a list of cards, so I added yet
another component - Role badge:
I'm using this same component on the profile tab:
## Discussion points
- Are we being defensive enough with the use of the flag? Should we
cover more?
- Are we breaking backwards compatibility in any way?
- What should we do when removing a role? Block or demote?
- Maybe some existing permission-related issues will surface with this
change: Are we being specific enough with our permissions? A lot of
places are simply checking for `ADMIN`;
- We may want to get rid of the API roles coupling we have with the
users and SAs and instead use the new hooks (e.g. `useRoles`)
explicitly;
- We should update the docs;
- Maybe we could allow the user to add a custom role directly from the
role selector component;
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
Adds feature usage info and custom strategy counters to the version
check object.
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
## About the changes
When a feature is not found in a project we should fail with a NotFound
error. If the feature belongs to a different project, it should not be a
permission issue, because the user might not be aware (lack of
permissions/visibility) of that other project, so even in this case the
error should be NotFound (this also works if we ever allow the same
feature name in different projects)
Fixes#3726
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
Edit application under
https://app.unleash-hosted.com/demo/applications/test-app is currently
not working as the appName is expected to come in the request body, but
it's actually part of the url. We have two options here:
1. We change the UI to adapt to the expectations of the request by
adding appName to the request body (and eventually removing appName from
the URL, which would be a breaking change)
2. We remove the restriction of only sending the appName in the body and
take the one that comes in the URL. We have a validation that verifies
that at least one of the two sets the appName
([here](e376088668/src/lib/services/client-metrics/instance-service.ts (L208))
we validate using [this
schema](e376088668/src/lib/services/client-metrics/schema.ts (L55-L70)))
In terms of REST API, we can assume that the appName will be present in
the resource `/api/admin/metrics/applications` (an endpoint we don't
have), but when we're updating an application we should refer to that
application by its URL: `/api/admin/metrics/applications/<appName>` and
the presence of an appName in the body might indicate that we're trying
to change the name of the application (something we currently not
support)
Based on the above, I believe going with the second option is best, as
it adheres to REST principles and does not require a breaking change.
Despite that, we only support updating applications as the creation is
done from metrics ingestion
Fixes: #3580
This PR improves our handling of internal Joi errors, to make them more
sensible to the end user. It does that by providing a better description
of the errors and by telling the user what they value they provided was.
Previous conversion:
```json
{
"id": "705a8dc0-1198-4894-9015-f1e5b9992b48",
"name": "BadDataError",
"message": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items",
"details": [
{
"message": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items",
"description": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items"
}
]
}
```
New conversion:
```json
{
"id": "87fb4715-cbdd-48bb-b4d7-d354e7d97380",
"name": "BadDataError",
"message": "Request validation failed: your request body contains invalid data. Refer to the `details` list for more information.",
"details": [
{
"description": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items. You provided [].",
"message": "\"value\" must contain at least 1 items. You provided []."
}
]
}
```
## Restructuring
This PR moves some code out of `unleash-error.ts` and into a new file.
The purpose of this is twofold:
1. avoid circular dependencies (we need imports from both UnleashError
and BadDataError)
2. carve out a clearer separation of concerns, keeping `unleash-error` a
little more focused.
If apiTokens are enabled breaks middleware chain with a 401 if no token
is found for requests to client and frontend apis. Previously the
middleware allowed the chain to process.
Removes the regex search for multiple slashes, and instead configures
the apiTokenMiddleware to reject unauthorized requests.
After a Team Retro, one of our squads felt like we needed more data on
our test suites. This is the first effort to make our test results
easier to grab. It uses the test-reporter action to add a github check
to our main build and PR builds with our test results.
This at least should make it easier to parse which tests are failing.
However, it does not give us trends. So it does not yet make it easier
to decide which tests are flaky just from a quick view.
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1071/prevent-users-from-disabling-password-authentication-when-there-are-no
Improves the behavior of disabling password based login by adding some
relevant information and a confirmation dialog with a warning. This felt
better than trying to disable the toggle, by still allowing the end
users to make the decision, except now it should be a properly informed
decision with confirmation.
- **Password based administrators**: Admin accounts that have a password
set;
- **Other administrators**: Other admin users that do not have a
password. May be SSO, but may also be users that did not set a password
yet;
- **Admin service accounts**: Service accounts that have the admin root
role. Depending on how you're using the SA this may not necessarily mean
locking yourself out of an admin account, especially if you secured its
token beforehand;
- **Admin API tokens**: Similar to the above. If you secured an admin
API token beforehand, you still have access to all features through the
API;
Each one of them link to the respective page inside Unleash (e.g. users
page, service accounts page, tokens page...);
If you try to disable and press "save", and only in that scenario, you
are presented with the following confirmation dialog:
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
Improves the openapi schema specifications for the schemas belonging to
the "Projects" tag.
Expected error codes/http statues, descriptions, and example data
---------
Co-authored-by: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
### What
In the demo when listing possible users to grant access to your project,
we inadvertently expose emails when listing users you can grant access
to. This PR anonymises the access list on the way out.
This PR reuses the revision Id information from the "optimal 304 for
server SDKs" to improve the freshness of the frontend API config data.
In addition it allows us to reduce the polling (and eventually remove it
when we are confident).
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
OpenAPI schema updates for Personal Access Tokens, http statuses,
property types and examples, return types
---------
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
Co-authored-by: mergify[bot] <37929162+mergify[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
