[Microsoft_defender_endpoint] Add support for Oauth2 scopes

[P1llus]

What does this PR do?

Some customers uses a different Oauth2 authentication flow, so I will keep the original Azure resource implementation while adding the optional support for Oauth2 scopes.

When a scope is defined, it will negate these two lines in httpjson:

auth.oauth2.provider: azure
auth.oauth2.azure.resource: {{azure_resource}}

The reason for this is the difference in Oauth2 flow, and the expected URL parameters and POST body format used. The earlier API versions was dependent on the concept of providing resources, and the provider parameter is simply used by the Golang Oauth2 library to provide certain Azure specific features.

Once the API changed, it now only requires Oauth2 scopes to provided instead of resources. We still want to support both for the people that are still using the old version, and if we can determine when/if the old way is deprecated, we can switch to scopes being the default option.

Checklist

• I have reviewed tips for building integrations and this pull request is aligned with them.
• I have verified that all data streams collect metrics or logs.
• I have added an entry to my package's changelog.yml file.
• I have verified that Kibana version constraints are current according to guidelines.

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/security-external-integrations (Team:Security-External Integrations)

[elasticmachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

• Start Time: 2023-01-17T08:47:14.292+0000

• Duration: 15 min 44 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test	Results
Failed	0
Passed	7
Skipped	0
Total	7

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

• /test : Re-trigger the build.

[elasticmachine]

🌐 Coverage report

Name	Metrics % (covered/total)	Diff
Packages	100.0% (1/1)	💚
Files	100.0% (1/1)	💚 2.747
Classes	100.0% (1/1)	💚 2.747
Methods	90.909% (10/11)	👎 -0.234
Lines	88.679% (235/265)	👎 -3.336
Conditionals	100.0% (0/0)	💚

[efd6]

It would be helpful if the commit message explains the rationale for making scopes != null v oauth2.provider = azure disjoint. I can see in httpjson why this is done, but it's otherwise sort of surprising. An explanation of the flow that's being used would do this.

[elasticmachine]

Package microsoft_defender_endpoint - 2.8.0 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=microsoft_defender_endpoint