I've tried to use/add the audit info to all events I could see/find.
This makes this PR necessarily huge, because we do store quite a few
events.
I realise it might not be complete yet, but tests
run green, and I think we now have a pattern to follow for other events.
## About the changes
When edge is configured to automatically generate tokens, it requires
the token to be present in all unleash instances.
It's behind a flag which enables us to turn it on on a case by case
scenario.
The risk of this implementation is that we'd be adding load to the
database in the middleware that evaluates tokens (which are present in
mostly all our API calls. We only query when the token is missing but
because the /client and /frontend endpoints which will be the affected
ones are high throughput, we want to be extra careful to avoid DDoSing
ourselves
## Alternatives:
One alternative would be that we merge the two endpoints into one.
Currently, Edge does the following:
If the token is not valid, it tries to create a token using a service
account token and /api/admin/create-token endpoint. Then it uses the
token generated (which is returned from the prior endpoint) to query
/api/frontend. What if we could call /api/frontend with the same service
account we use to create the token? It may sound risky but if the same
application holding the service account token with permission to create
a token, can call /api/frontend via the generated token, shouldn't it be
able to call the endpoint directly?
The purpose of the token is authentication and authorization. With the
two tokens we are authenticating the same app with 2 different
authorization scopes, but because it's the same app we are
authenticating, can't we just use one token and assume that the app has
both scopes?
If the service account already has permissions to create a token and
then use that token for further actions, allowing it to directly call
/api/frontend does not necessarily introduce new security risks. The
only risk is allowing the app to generate new tokens. Which leads to the
third alternative: should we just remove this option from edge?
## About the changes
getAllActive from api-tokens store is the second most frequent query
![image](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/455064/63c5ae76-bb62-41b2-95b4-82aca59a7c16)
To prevent starving our db connections, we can cache this data that
rarely changes and clear the cache when we see changes. Because we will
only clear changes in the node receiving the change we're only caching
the data for 1 minute.
This should give us some room to test if this solution will work
---------
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
Lots of work here, mostly because I didn't want to turn off the
`noImplicitAnyLet` lint. This PR tries its best to type all the untyped
lets biome complained about (Don't ask me how many hours that took or
how many lints that was >200...), which in the future will force test
authors to actually type their global variables setup in `beforeAll`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
### What
Adds `createdByUserId` to all events exposed by unleash. In addition
this PR updates all tests and usages of the methods in this codebase to
include the required number.
https://linear.app/unleash/issue/2-1403/consider-refactoring-the-way-tags-are-fetched-for-the-events
This adds 2 methods to `EventService`:
- `storeEvent`;
- `storeEvents`;
This allows us to run event-specific logic inside these methods. In the
case of this PR, this means fetching the feature tags in case the event
contains a `featureName` and there are no tags specified in the event.
This prevents us from having to remember to fetch the tags in order to
store feature-related events except for very specific cases, like the
deletion of a feature - You can't fetch tags for a feature that no
longer exists, so in that case we need to pre-fetch the tags before
deleting the feature.
This also allows us to do any event-specific post-processing to the
event before reaching the DB layer.
In general I think it's also nicer that we reference the event service
instead of the event store directly.
There's a lot of changes and a lot of files touched, but most of it is
boilerplate to inject the `eventService` where needed instead of using
the `eventStore` directly.
Hopefully this will be a better approach than
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/4729
---------
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. -->
This deprecates the `username` properties on api-token schemas, and adds
a `tokenName` property.
DB field `username` has been renamed to `token_name`, migration added
for the rename.
Both `username` and `tokenName` can be used when consuming the service,
but only one of them.
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
There's a couple of things I'd like to get opinions on and discuss:
- Frontend still uses the deprecated `username` property
- ApiTokenSchema is used both for input and output of `Create`
controller endpoints and should be split out into separate schemas. I'll
set up a task for this
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: mergify[bot] <37929162+mergify[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- 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! ❤️ -->
Backports stickiness fixes
## 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. -->
<!-- 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? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
Co-authored-by: GitHub Actions Bot <>
Co-authored-by: Mateusz Kwasniewski <kwasniewski.mateusz@gmail.com>
This PR moves the getProjectOverview method out from the project health
controller. It doesn't make sense that this method lives here anymore,
as over time it has grown into method that relays all information about
a single project. It makes more sense that this now lives on the root of
the project api. Also removes unwanted duplication of getProjectOverview
from the project-service and the project-health-service.
## About the changes
We need a way to have an audit log for operations made on Api Tokens.
These changes adds three new event types, API_TOKEN_CREATED,
API_TOKEN_UPDATED, API_TOKEN_DELETED and extends api-token-service to
store these to our event store to reflect the action being taken.
* Implement user grouping feature for permissions
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
Co-authored-by: Jaanus Sellin <sellinjaanus@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
This adds support for multi project tokens to be created. Backward compatibility is handled at 3 different layers here:
- The API is made backwards compatible though a permissive data type that accepts either a project?: string or projects?: string[] property, validation is done through JOI here, which ensures that projects and project are not set together. In the case of neither, this defaults to the previous default of ALL_PROJECTS
- The service layer method to handle adding tokens has been made tolerant to either of the above case and has been deprecated, a new method supporting only the new structure of using projects has been added
- Existing compatibility for consumers of Unleash as a library should not be affected either, the ApiUser constructor is now tolerant to the the first input and will internally map to the new cleaned structure
Our testing and internal validation has proven that
the :global: environment concept confuses people more
than the problems it solves. We have thus decided to
group all configuration that was created before the
environment concept was introduced in to the "default
environment. This would still make everything work
as before in addition to introducing the env concept.
Co-authored-by: Christopher Kolstad <chriswk@getunleash.ai>
feat: options are now typed
- This makes it easier to know what to send to unleash.start / unleash.create
- Using a Partial to instantiate the config, then melding it with defaults to get a config object with all fields set either to their defaults or to whatever is passed in.
Co-authored-by: Fredrik Strand Oseberg <fredrik.no@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivar Conradi Østhus <ivarconr@gmail.com>