SYN-4842: excluded file types client - #40
Merged
Merged
Conversation
bchhay-splunk
approved these changes
Jun 22, 2026
mtichy-splunk
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2026
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Resolves SYN-4842
Before the change?
syntheticsclient/v2had browser check model support forexcludedFiles, but no client method to discover the API-owned excluded file types.makePublicAPICallprinted full dumped requests to stdout after settingX-SF-TOKEN, which could expose API tokens in logs.After the change?
ExcludedFileTypesResponse.GetExcludedFileTypesV2()forGET /excluded_file_types, parsing the publicexcludedFileTypesresponse field.makePublicAPICall.RequestDetails.RequestBodycompatibility while redacting the client API key before storing request details.Pull request checklist
make testacc), and pasted in this PR (for bug fixes / features) - N/A: client SDK unit-only change.Acceptance Test Output
N/A. This client SDK change is covered by unit tests.
Does this introduce a breaking change?