-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
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
Add support for unconsenting a permission #1844
Comments
@RabebOthmani this work item needs a UI/UX design wireframe or the other option if for us to prototype and review together |
@adhiambovivian my plan is to do minimal UI/UX changes due to resources. We will rely on the current UI and make necessary changes on it. |
@darrelmiller @adhiambovivian @MaryannGitonga @gavinbarron for the permissions tab, here's what I'm thinking. Please remember that the goal here is not to reinvent the UI and do minimum required work there. |
@MaryannGitonga as for the actual implementation, what we need is to update oAuth2PermissionGrant to remove items (permissions in this case). |
@darrelmiller @gavinbarron @adhiambovivian @MaryannGitonga for the Permissions list under the user's profile. I captured some challenges with the current experience Permissions.list.mp4Similar to the permissions tab, is there any value of showing a count of the permissions selected? After some thought, do we want to encourage users to select a group of permissions? Isn't that against the recommendation to consent the least privileged whenever possible? @darrelmiller I'd love your opinion on this. |
How are we filtering the list of permissions cc @adhiambovivian |
I'm extrapolating a little here but it sounds like at an absolute minimum the user needs to have User.Read for some calls and there is no lower valid permission that can be consented to. Can we prevent these permissions from being unconsented and add a call out in the UI that User.Read and Directory.Read.All are the lowest permissions available to still have the GE application functional? |
@gavinbarron in that case, should |
Great question, and I'm sorry to answer with another question. I'm hesitant to ask for those permissions until we absolutely need them, such as when a user wants to revoke consent for a scope just due to them having such wide reach. As a good practice we should ask only for the minimum permissions necessary initially and then leverage incremental consent as needed. |
@gavinbarron These are the default permissions are openid, profile and User.Read. The two permissions required for unconsenting require admin consent unlike the current default permissions. With regard to and appreciation of the principle of least privilege access, then the best option would be to let the user consent to them when they need to revoke a permission. |
I agree, thank you. |
@Onokaev per our conversation today during the sync:
|
@Onokaev the consent/revoke button is the most important functionality on this screen and yet I can't see it properly. In comparaison the description is taking too much horizontal space. |
@RabebOthmani what did you try to filter? I just tested and it's working on my end |
@RabebOthmani happy to lend a hand here, although it looks like @Onokaev has added some text wrapping and a fix to ensure that the Consent/Unconsent button is not obscured by the scrollbar. |
Hey @RabebOthmani. This filtering requires some work on the DevX API repo |
Ticket tracking filtering of permissions: microsoftgraph/microsoft-graph-devx-api#1232 |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
It is currently not possible from within Graph Explorer to remove a previously consented scope to test scopes with lower privileges.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: