Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file #3195
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Overall package sizeSelf size: 4.22 MB Dependency sizes
🤖 This report was automatically generated by heaviest-objects-in-the-universe |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3195 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 86.49% 86.59% +0.09%
==========================================
Files 337 337
Lines 12020 12059 +39
Branches 33 33
==========================================
+ Hits 10397 10442 +45
+ Misses 1623 1617 -6
... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
uurien
force-pushed
the
ugaitz/rc-custom-blocking
branch
from
2a43d97
to
a7eaaa9
Compare
iunanua
reviewed
May 30, 2023
iunanua
reviewed
May 30, 2023
iunanua
reviewed
May 30, 2023
iunanua
reviewed
May 30, 2023
uurien
force-pushed
the
ugaitz/rc-custom-blocking
branch
from
bc71599
to
c723fe8
Compare
hoolioh
approved these changes
Jun 1, 2023
iunanua
approved these changes
Jun 1, 2023
uurien
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2023
* Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file * Use if/else instead of return * Code styles * Split block in two methods * Fix test * Unapply after test * Fix tests * Reorder params in method * Change the signature of updateBlockingConfiguration method * Clear blocking configuration on clear rules * Update blocking response type by configuration * Fix lint
uurien
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2023
* Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file * Use if/else instead of return * Code styles * Split block in two methods * Fix test * Unapply after test * Fix tests * Reorder params in method * Change the signature of updateBlockingConfiguration method * Clear blocking configuration on clear rules * Update blocking response type by configuration * Fix lint
uurien
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 1, 2023
* Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file * Use if/else instead of return * Code styles * Split block in two methods * Fix test * Unapply after test * Fix tests * Reorder params in method * Change the signature of updateBlockingConfiguration method * Clear blocking configuration on clear rules * Update blocking response type by configuration * Fix lint
This was referenced Jun 2, 2023
Merged
Merged
Merged
uurien
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2023
* Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file * Use if/else instead of return * Code styles * Split block in two methods * Fix test * Unapply after test * Fix tests * Reorder params in method * Change the signature of updateBlockingConfiguration method * Clear blocking configuration on clear rules * Update blocking response type by configuration * Fix lint
uurien
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2023
* Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file * Use if/else instead of return * Code styles * Split block in two methods * Fix test * Unapply after test * Fix tests * Reorder params in method * Change the signature of updateBlockingConfiguration method * Clear blocking configuration on clear rules * Update blocking response type by configuration * Fix lint
uurien
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 2, 2023
* Update blocking page and status from RC or rules file * Use if/else instead of return * Code styles * Split block in two methods * Fix test * Unapply after test * Fix tests * Reorder params in method * Change the signature of updateBlockingConfiguration method * Clear blocking configuration on clear rules * Update blocking response type by configuration * Fix lint
simon-id
reviewed
Sep 25, 2023
| @@ -49,7 +93,12 @@ function setTemplates (config) { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| function updateBlockingConfiguration (newBlockingConfiguration) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why is this called update... when there is a function above called set...
Comment on lines
+58
to
+60
| if (blockingConfiguration && blockingConfiguration.type === 'block_request' && | ||
| blockingConfiguration.parameters.status_code) { | ||
| res.statusCode = blockingConfiguration.parameters.status_code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
all of the complicated blockingConfiguration checks should be done in updateBlockingConfiguration() that would compile the variables neccesary only when updated, not in every request. You don't need to check that blockingConfiguration.type is block_request in EVERY request do you ?
Comment on lines
+36
to
52
| if (!blockingConfiguration || blockingConfiguration.parameters.type === 'auto') { | ||
| if (accept && accept.includes('text/html') && !accept.includes('application/json')) { | ||
| type = 'text/html; charset=utf-8' | ||
| body = templateHtml | ||
| } else { | ||
| type = 'application/json' | ||
| body = templateJson | ||
| } | ||
| } else { | ||
| type = 'application/json' | ||
| body = templateJson | ||
| if (blockingConfiguration.parameters.type === 'html') { | ||
| type = 'text/html; charset=utf-8' | ||
| body = templateHtml | ||
| } else { | ||
| type = 'application/json' | ||
| body = templateJson | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This whole block should be rewritten to be clearer tbh
Comment on lines
+156
to
+160
|
|
||
| if (newActions.modified) { | ||
| blocking.updateBlockingConfiguration(concatArrays(newActions).find(action => action.id === 'block')) | ||
| appliedActions = newActions | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you still need to apply the new applyState here since it's not done by the batch thing above.
Also wouldn't updating actions when the waf fails cause synchronisation problems ? waf rules are referencing an action, so if you update the actions but not the waf rules then you might end of with an inconsistent state no ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think so.
actions thing is not directly related with the WAF, the waf result would be the same, block or not to block, but the action to do with the result is different.
We don't need to say anything to the waf, we just need to change the behaviour of the blocking.
block with redirect, with custome message, with different status code etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you still need to apply the new applyState here since it's not done by the batch thing above.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
Make it possible for the customers to define the status code or the redirect url for the blocking page.
If they are defined in the custom rules file, the tracer will start to take the action defined there.
Plugin Checklist