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

check admin exists instead of user count #6648

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2016
Merged

check admin exists instead of user count #6648

merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2016

Conversation

dgnorton
Copy link
Contributor

@dgnorton dgnorton commented May 17, 2016

Required for all non-trivial PRs
  • Rebased/mergable
  • Tests pass
  • CHANGELOG.md updated

When authenticating a request, check that an admin user exists instead
of checking for len(users) > 0. This prevents getting stuck with no
admin users and being unable to create one.

@mention-bot
Copy link

By analyzing the blame information on this pull request, we identified @gunnaraasen, @joelegasse and @e-dard to be potential reviewers

@e-dard e-dard changed the title ceck admin exists instead of user count check admin exists instead of user count May 17, 2016
When authenticating a request, check that an admin user exists instead
of checking for len(users) > 0. This prevents getting stuck with no
admin user and being unable to create one.
@e-dard
Copy link
Contributor

e-dard commented May 17, 2016

LGTM 👍

Note that this will probably require a change to the wording in the docs

Note: If you enable authentication and have no users, InfluxDB will not enforce authentication and will only accept the query that creates a new admin user. InfluxDB will enforce authentication once there is an admin user.

Should probably say something like ...and have no admin users... /cc @rkuchan

@dgnorton dgnorton merged commit c325c82 into master May 17, 2016
@dgnorton dgnorton deleted the dn-check-admin branch May 17, 2016 12:36
@timhallinflux timhallinflux added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Dec 20, 2016
timhallinflux added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2016
v1.0.0 bug fixes referenced issue #6649...but that issue was addressed by #6648.  Changelog now correctly references #6648...
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.

None yet

4 participants