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

Allow for optional AZP validation in authentication_service #2082

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 16, 2024

Conversation

pitwegner
Copy link
Contributor

@pitwegner pitwegner commented Sep 13, 2024

Closes #2077.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Introduced a new configuration option for enhanced control over OpenID verification settings.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved validation logic for the authorized party (AZP) parameter in the authentication process, allowing for better flexibility based on configuration settings.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 13, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes introduce a new configuration option for verifying the authorized party (AZP) in the OpenID Connect flow within the Spiffworkflow backend. The configuration allows for more granular control over AZP verification, which is reflected in the authentication logic. The modifications include the addition of a new environment variable and adjustments to the validation method for the AZP parameter based on the configuration setting.

Changes

Files Change Summary
spiffworkflow_backend/config/default.py, spiffworkflow_backend/services/authentication_service.py Added a new configuration option for AZP verification and modified the authentication logic to utilize this configuration.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Authorized Party Check does not make sense (#2077)

Tip

OpenAI O1 model for chat
  • We have deployed OpenAI's latest O1 model for chat.
  • OpenAI claims that this model has superior reasoning capabilities than their GPT-4o model.
  • Please share any feedback with us in the discussions post.

Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between fe36138 and 98b615a.

Files selected for processing (2)
  • spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/config/default.py (1 hunks)
  • spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/services/authentication_service.py (1 hunks)
Additional comments not posted (2)
spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/config/default.py (1)

123-123: LGTM!

The addition of the SPIFFWORKFLOW_BACKEND_OPEN_ID_VERIFY_AZP configuration option with a default value of True is a good approach to provide flexibility in the AZP verification process. It allows for granular control over the verification of the authorization party (AZP) in the OpenID Connect flow, while maintaining the current behavior by default.

This change aligns with the PR objective of addressing the issue related to the AZP check in the authentication service, as outlined in the linked issue #2077. It provides a way to make the AZP validation optional, accommodating scenarios where a token is exchanged from a different service.

spiffworkflow-backend/src/spiffworkflow_backend/services/authentication_service.py (1)

331-331: Looks good! The change enhances the flexibility of the azp validation.

The modification introduces a new condition that checks the SPIFFWORKFLOW_BACKEND_OPEN_ID_VERIFY_AZP configuration setting. If this setting is False, the method will return True when azp is None, effectively skipping the azp validation. This allows the azp validation to be optional based on the application's configuration.

This change is beneficial in scenarios where the azp claim is not present in the token or not required for authentication. It provides flexibility to accommodate different authentication flows and token formats.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@pitwegner
Copy link
Contributor Author

Is there a place where environment/config variables need to be documented?

@burnettk burnettk merged commit 4ca1e53 into sartography:main Sep 16, 2024
22 checks passed
@burnettk
Copy link
Contributor

we don't have a separate place for documenting these other than default.py itself. thanks for the contribution!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Authorized Party Check does not make sense
2 participants