GraphQL Introspection can't be disabled

[JulianAtTheFrontend]

Link to reproduction

No response

Describe the Bug

Currently there is no way to disable GraphQL introspection and I'd rather call it a bug than a feature request as it exposes the complete schema without any restrictions. Ideally I'd even like to apply an access rule e.g. to still fetch it for development of a headless frontend.

To Reproduce

Just enable graphQL and try to retreive the schema with @graphql-codegen/cli

// codegen.ts
// https://the-guild.dev/graphql/codegen/plugins/other/schema-ast
import type { CodegenConfig } from '@graphql-codegen/cli';

const config: CodegenConfig = {
  overwrite: true,
  generates: {
    './src/types/payloadSchema.graphql': {
      schema: 'https://<PAYLOAD_URL>/api/graphql',
      plugins: ['schema-ast'],
    },
  }
};

export default config;

Payload Version

2.0.11

Adapters and Plugins

No response

[jmikrut]

Hey @JulianAtTheFrontend — while disabling GraphQL introspection does indeed expose the full schema, you can get it via a variety of other ways even if introspection is disabled. Take a look here:

https://escape.tech/blog/should-i-disable-introspection-in-graphql/

But I would agree that we could enable a flag to restrict introspection. It looks to me like this package could work:

https://www.npmjs.com/package/graphql-disable-introspection

So I think maybe the move is to just allow for custom validationRules where then the developer could inject this package if they'd like to.

What do you think about this? In the end, I don't think this is truly a bug though - so I'll switch it over to our roadmap.

[JulianAtTheFrontend]

Yes, I agree - in the end it makes sense to disable both: introspection and field suggestions. Even though there might be more (and more complicated) ways to still get the full schema I would personally disable introspection and field suggestions to add two small layers of security to my backend. It always depends on the use case but I guess there are some cases where it really makes sense.

[vladvlasov256]

Correct me if I'm wrong, please. Custom validationRules currently aren't supported?