HttpMethodValidator produces 404 instead of 405 response

[schmengler]

Summary

The validation based on the new (2.3.0+) HTTP method marker interfaces (HttpGetActionInterface, HttpPostActionInterface, ...) throw an exception that is turned into a 404 response by the front controller:

        throw new InvalidRequestException(
            new NotFoundException(new Phrase('Page not found.'))
        );

A proper response status code would be 405 Method Not Allowed.

Steps to reproduce

1. Make a GET request to an action with HttpPostActionInterface
2. Watch the status code received.

Expected Result

1. 404 Not Found.

Actual Result

1. 405 Method Not Allowed.

Proposed solution

1. Use a different "replace result" than NotFoundException that at least returns an error page with the correct status code. Minimum solution: send correct status code
2. Do not mis-use exceptions as results at all Architectural improvement: do not mix unrelated types
3. Add more marker interfaces to determine the type of result, i.e. JsonActionInterface, HtmlActionInterface, ... and return a different body depending on those Ideal solution: enable handling of 405 errors in different context

[m2-assistant]

Hi @schmengler. Thank you for your report.
To help us process this issue please make sure that you provided the following information:

• Summary of the issue
• Information on your environment
• Steps to reproduce
• Expected and actual results

Please make sure that the issue is reproducible on the vanilla Magento instance following Steps to reproduce. To deploy vanilla Magento instance on our environment, please, add a comment to the issue:

@magento give me 2.3-develop instance - upcoming 2.3.x release

For more details, please, review the Magento Contributor Assistant documentation.

@schmengler do you confirm that you were able to reproduce the issue on vanilla Magento instance following steps to reproduce?

• yes
• no

---

• Join Magento Community Engineering Slack and ask your questions in #github channel.

[m2-assistant]

Hi @engcom-Bravo. Thank you for working on this issue.
In order to make sure that issue has enough information and ready for development, please read and check the following instruction: 👇

• 1. Verify that issue has all the required information. (Preconditions, Steps to reproduce, Expected result, Actual result).

  Details

  If the issue has a valid description, the label Issue: Format is valid will be added to the issue automatically. Please, edit issue description if needed, until label Issue: Format is valid appears.

• 2. Verify that issue has a meaningful description and provides enough information to reproduce the issue. If the report is valid, add Issue: Clear Description label to the issue by yourself.

• 3. Add Component: XXXXX label(s) to the ticket, indicating the components it may be related to.

• 4. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch

  Details

  - Add the comment @magento give me 2.3-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
  - If the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch, please, add the label Reproduced on 2.3.x.
  - If the issue is not reproducible, add your comment that issue is not reproducible and close the issue and stop verification process here!

• 5. Add label Issue: Confirmed once verification is complete.

• 6. Make sure that automatic system confirms that report has been added to the backlog.

[magento-engcom-team]

@engcom-Bravo Thank you for verifying the issue.

Unfortunately, not enough information was provided to acknowledge ticket. Please consider adding the following:

• Update issue content to follow format required by Issue Reporting Guidelines

Once all required information is added, please add label "Issue: Confirmed" again.
Thanks!

[magento-engcom-team]

✅ Confirmed by @engcom-Bravo
Thank you for verifying the issue. Based on the provided information internal tickets MC-20228 were created

Issue Available: @engcom-Bravo, You will be automatically unassigned. Contributors/Maintainers can claim this issue to continue. To reclaim and continue work, reassign the ticket to yourself.

[m2-assistant]

Hi @anujwebkul. Thank you for working on this issue.
Looks like this issue is already verified and confirmed. But if you want to validate it one more time, please, go though the following instruction:

• 1. Add/Edit Component: XXXXX label(s) to the ticket, indicating the components it may be related to.

• 2. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch

  Details

  - Add the comment @magento give me 2.3-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
  - If the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch, please, add the label Reproduced on 2.3.x.
  - If the issue is not reproducible, add your comment that issue is not reproducible and close the issue and stop verification process here!

• 3. If the issue is not relevant or is not reproducible any more, feel free to close it.

---

• Join Magento Community Engineering Slack and ask your questions in #github channel.

[ghost]

@magento i am working on it.

[m2-assistant]

Hi @vishesh-webkul. Thank you for working on this issue.
Looks like this issue is already verified and confirmed. But if you want to validate it one more time, please, go though the following instruction:

• 1. Add/Edit Component: XXXXX label(s) to the ticket, indicating the components it may be related to.

• 2. Verify that the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch

  Details

  - Add the comment @magento give me 2.3-develop instance to deploy test instance on Magento infrastructure.
  - If the issue is reproducible on 2.3-develop branch, please, add the label Reproduced on 2.3.x.
  - If the issue is not reproducible, add your comment that issue is not reproducible and close the issue and stop verification process here!

• 3. If the issue is not relevant or is not reproducible any more, feel free to close it.

---

• Join Magento Community Engineering Slack and ask your questions in #github channel.

[buskamuza]

Just wanted to link the original discussion here magento/architecture#10 (comment) (the decision was to have 404).