Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixes to IoTHub diff algorithm #2951

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 21, 2019

Conversation

maxbog
Copy link
Contributor

@maxbog maxbog commented Feb 26, 2019

Specific fixes:

  • properties batch_frequency_in_seconds, max_chunk_size_in_bytes, encoding, container_name, file_name_format are only applicable to endpoints of type AzureIotHub.StorageContainer
  • connection_string diff algorithm takes into account the masked Access Keys when reading the connection string from Azure
  • connection_string diff algorithm takes into account the default port for EventHub endpoints

@maxbog
Copy link
Contributor Author

maxbog commented Mar 5, 2019

@tombuildsstuff Is there anyone that can review the changes? One of the things this fixes is secret leakage to the console. Right now, connection strings with secret access keys are shown in plain text while printing the execution plan.

Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @maxbog,

Thank you for the PR,

There is alot going on in here so ideally this would have been a bit better split up into a couple PRs so we could have merged the obvious ones such as marking the connection string as sensitive.

I am struggling to understand the need for the suppressIfTypeIsNot calls, could you elaborate upon them? Aside from those the rest of the PR LGTM 🙂

@maxbog
Copy link
Contributor Author

maxbog commented Mar 6, 2019

@katbyte Thanks for the review, I extracted the obvious parts to a different PR: #3007
I will remove those changes from this PR.

As for the suppressIfTypeIsNot checks:
The problem is that the endpoint element supports different types of endpoints (Storage container, Service Bus, Event Hub). However, the properties that have suppressed diffs are only applicable to AzureIotHub.StorageContainer type. This, combined with them being optional and having a default value, caused the diff to show changes in their value when creating an endpoint of a different type.

For example when I defined the following simple endpoint:

endpoint {
    type = "AzureIotHub.EventHub"

    connection_string = "${azurerm_eventhub_authorization_rule.device_messages_iothubroutes.primary_connection_string}"
    name = "device-messages"
}

The second apply, which should not show any changes, actually shows this:

endpoint.0.batch_frequency_in_seconds: "0" => "300"
endpoint.0.max_chunk_size_in_bytes:    "0" => "314572800"
endpoint.0.type:                       "" => "AzureIotHub.EventHub"

Of course, this does not actually result in any changes being made, so the diff output is incorrect.

The approach adopted here with the SuppressDiffFunc is used in AWS provider, that's where I got the inspiration:
https://github.com/terraform-providers/terraform-provider-aws/blob/042ed092aaeafb5e4beef583adb0d6bb8695c9c4/aws/resource_aws_lb.go#L176

However, please do not merge this PR for now, as I think there may be an issue with DiffSuppressFunc of the connection_string property.

@ghost ghost removed the waiting-response label Mar 6, 2019
@maxbog maxbog changed the title Fixes to IoTHub diff algorithm WIP Fixes to IoTHub diff algorithm Mar 6, 2019
@maxbog maxbog force-pushed the f/iothub_diff_algorithm_fixes branch from 98bd1df to 91d4c08 Compare March 6, 2019 11:15
@ghost ghost added size/S and removed size/M labels Mar 6, 2019
@maxbog maxbog force-pushed the f/iothub_diff_algorithm_fixes branch from 91d4c08 to a4b3f25 Compare March 6, 2019 12:40
@ghost ghost added size/M and removed size/S labels Mar 6, 2019
@maxbog maxbog changed the title WIP Fixes to IoTHub diff algorithm Fixes to IoTHub diff algorithm Mar 6, 2019
@maxbog
Copy link
Contributor Author

maxbog commented Mar 6, 2019

@katbyte I believe the PR can be merged now, I changed the diff supression logic a bit for connection_string property

Copy link
Collaborator

@katbyte katbyte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for splitting it out @maxbog, we'll get the other one merged shortly, however this one is currently failing on the tests with:

------- Stdout: -------
=== RUN   TestAccAzureRMIotHub_customRoutes
=== PAUSE TestAccAzureRMIotHub_customRoutes
=== CONT  TestAccAzureRMIotHub_customRoutes
--- FAIL: TestAccAzureRMIotHub_customRoutes (97.26s)
    testing.go:538: Step 0 error: Error applying: 1 error occurred:
        	* azurerm_iothub.test: 1 error occurred:
        	* azurerm_iothub.test: Error creating/updating IotHub "acctestIoTHub-190306190727160725" (Resource Group "acctestRG-190306190727160725"): devices.IotHubResourceClient#CreateOrUpdate: Failure sending request: StatusCode=400 -- Original Error: Code="Failed" Message="The async operation failed." InnerError={"unmarshalError":"json: cannot unmarshal number into Go struct field serviceError2.code of type string"} AdditionalInfo=[{"code":400116,"httpStatusCode":"BadRequest","message":"endpointName:export, exceptionMessage:The argument must not be empty string.\r\nParameter name: containerName. If you contact a support representative please include this correlation identifier: 4b1e7873-fa43-4ef9-9d1c-6e09d146e04f, timestamp: 2019-03-06 19:08:04Z, errorcode: IH400116."}]

@maxbog maxbog force-pushed the f/iothub_diff_algorithm_fixes branch from 010901f to 0ad81ea Compare March 8, 2019 22:13
@maxbog
Copy link
Contributor Author

maxbog commented Mar 9, 2019

@katbyte I fixed the code, the culprit was: c750319

I also extended the acceptance test to account for EventHub endpoint type.

@maxbog
Copy link
Contributor Author

maxbog commented Mar 18, 2019

@katbyte: Any comments?

@katbyte
Copy link
Collaborator

katbyte commented Mar 21, 2019

Apologies for the delay @maxbog, my attention was elsewhere. Tests now pass and so this LGTM 🚀

@katbyte katbyte added this to the v1.24.0 milestone Mar 21, 2019
@katbyte katbyte merged commit 8f47717 into hashicorp:master Mar 21, 2019
katbyte added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2019
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 3, 2019

This has been released in version 1.24.0 of the provider. Please see the Terraform documentation on provider versioning or reach out if you need any assistance upgrading. As an example:

provider "azurerm" {
	version = "~> 1.24.0"
}
# ... other configuration ...

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 20, 2019

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you feel this issue should be reopened, we encourage creating a new issue linking back to this one for added context. If you feel I made an error 🤖 🙉 , please reach out to my human friends 👉 [email protected]. Thanks!

@ghost ghost locked and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 20, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants