logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
obrienmd  
#1 Posted : Thursday, May 31, 2018 4:01:14 PM(UTC)
obrienmd


Rank: Member

Medals: ScreenConnect Advisor: Focus Group Member

Joined: 2/6/2015(UTC)
Posts: 28
United States
Location: Seattle, WA

Per the 6.6 OpenAPI spec, the user lookup request should return json, but it seems to return plain text.

Sample python code:
Code:

response = s.post('http://localhost:8040/Services/SecurityService.ashx/user/lookup', headers={'Accept': 'application/json'}, json={'userSourceName': 'XmlMembershipProvider', 'testUserName': 'Administrator'})

print(code)
b'"User Name:\\n\\tAdministrator\\n\\nDisplay Name:\\n\\t\\n\\nEmail:\\n\\t\\n\\nComment:\\n\\t\\n\\nPassword Question:\\n\\t\\n\\nRoles:\\n\\tAdministrator (Matches defined role)\\n\\n"'

Scott  
#2 Posted : Monday, June 4, 2018 1:58:47 PM(UTC)
Scott


Rank: Administration

Medals: Level 4: Wise Old Owl! Received 100 Thanks!

Joined: 3/28/2014(UTC)
Posts: 2,764
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 338 time(s) in 292 post(s)
Thanks for the headsup, I have replicated the behavior and registered it as a defect.

I don't have an ETA on when a fix will be found, but we are moving towards it.
ScreenConnect Team
obrienmd  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, June 5, 2018 11:05:24 PM(UTC)
obrienmd


Rank: Member

Medals: ScreenConnect Advisor: Focus Group Member

Joined: 2/6/2015(UTC)
Posts: 28
United States
Location: Seattle, WA

Originally Posted by: Scott Go to Quoted Post
Thanks for the headsup, I have replicated the behavior and registered it as a defect.

I don't have an ETA on when a fix will be found, but we are moving towards it.


Thanks - any wild guess? This is one of the only things really holding us back on upgrading to 6.6.
Scott  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, June 6, 2018 11:38:57 AM(UTC)
Scott


Rank: Administration

Medals: Level 4: Wise Old Owl! Received 100 Thanks!

Joined: 3/28/2014(UTC)
Posts: 2,764
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 338 time(s) in 292 post(s)
@obrienmd unfortunately no, the issue is in the development team's queue where all issues are prioritized based upon severity. I can guess that since this is potentially indicative of a larger problem (but cannot confirm) that it is a higher priority issue, but even with that said I cannot say when it will be addressed.

Why would this issue be holding you back from 6.6?
ScreenConnect Team
obrienmd  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, June 6, 2018 2:41:29 PM(UTC)
obrienmd


Rank: Member

Medals: ScreenConnect Advisor: Focus Group Member

Joined: 2/6/2015(UTC)
Posts: 28
United States
Location: Seattle, WA

Originally Posted by: Scott Go to Quoted Post
@obrienmd unfortunately no, the issue is in the development team's queue where all issues are prioritized based upon severity. I can guess that since this is potentially indicative of a larger problem (but cannot confirm) that it is a higher priority issue, but even with that said I cannot say when it will be addressed.

Why would this issue be holding you back from 6.6?


I have a custom plugin that I don't want to send through the online approval process (it needs to stay private) - with a reasonable RESTful API, we can do what we need without a directly tied plugin. We don't hold perms data in SAML roles, so for the user part of the plugin we need to be able to set roles using an outside db call when they are provisioned.
Scott  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, June 13, 2018 12:41:13 PM(UTC)
Scott


Rank: Administration

Medals: Level 4: Wise Old Owl! Received 100 Thanks!

Joined: 3/28/2014(UTC)
Posts: 2,764
United States

Thanks: 3 times
Was thanked: 338 time(s) in 292 post(s)
So after further review and a pretty lengthy (and slightly heated) discussion within the developer team I have to post an update to say that we no longer believe this to be a bug. We do explicitly state that the return type is "Content-Type: application/json;" and while the data returned for this particular method is unstructured it is still valid json.

For example, using my sandbox server and making the request via RESTer with the following POST location:
Code:

http://my.sandbox.server:8040/Services/SecurityService.ashx/user/lookup


And performing the lookup with a valid user, 'Admin', I receive the following:
Code:

"User Name:\r\n\tadmin\r\n\r\nDisplay Name:\r\n\tAdmin\r\n\r\nEmail:\r\n\tmyemail@connectwise.com\r\n\r\nComment:\r\n\t\r\n\r\nPassword Question:\r\n\t\r\n\r\nRoles:\r\n\tAdministrator (Matches defined role)\r\n\r\n"


If you take that response and plug it into a JSON validator (like the one found here), it is determined to be valid JSON.

I'm more than open to feedback on this, but I no longer believe this to be a bug and I've updated the registered issue to reflect that.
ScreenConnect Team
obrienmd  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, June 13, 2018 2:16:16 PM(UTC)
obrienmd


Rank: Member

Medals: ScreenConnect Advisor: Focus Group Member

Joined: 2/6/2015(UTC)
Posts: 28
United States
Location: Seattle, WA

Originally Posted by: Scott Go to Quoted Post
So after further review and a pretty lengthy (and slightly heated) discussion within the developer team I have to post an update to say that we no longer believe this to be a bug. We do explicitly state that the return type is "Content-Type: application/json;" and while the data returned for this particular method is unstructured it is still valid json.

If you take that response and plug it into a JSON validator (like the one found here), it is determined to be valid JSON.

I'm more than open to feedback on this, but I no longer believe this to be a bug and I've updated the registered issue to reflect that.


Ehh... Feedback? This is a response I'd expect from... Hrm, I can't think of even a bigco that would say this with a straight face. Maybe... Nope, can't think of one.

If you're throwing a RESTful API in release notes, I expect better. It _may_ validate as a JSON object (hell, what won't), but it's not what a dev community would expect from something that calls itself a modern, usable HTTP API. At first, when I looked at your OpenAPI schema, I was dissappointed, but willing to provide the benefit of the doubt given it was new. Given this response, trajectory isn't looking great.

I'll work around it for now, but please don't expect our subscriptions to continue indefinitely with this type of response.
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.