Improve application access validation in client authentication #2942
Conversation
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
![wso2-engineering[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1856828?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Comment on lines
615
to
617
| public static boolean authenticateClient(String clientId, String clientSecretProvided, String appTenant) | ||
| throws IdentityOAuthAdminException, IdentityOAuth2Exception, InvalidOAuthClientException { | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Log Improvement Suggestion No: 1
Suggested change
| public static boolean authenticateClient(String clientId, String clientSecretProvided, String appTenant) | |
| throws IdentityOAuthAdminException, IdentityOAuth2Exception, InvalidOAuthClientException { | |
| public static boolean authenticateClient(String clientId, String clientSecretProvided, String appTenant) | |
| throws IdentityOAuthAdminException, IdentityOAuth2Exception, InvalidOAuthClientException { | |
| log.info("Authenticating OAuth client: " + clientId); |
Comment on lines
+618
to
+619
| if (!isApplicationAccessible(clientId, appTenant)) { | ||
| throw new InvalidOAuthClientException("Application is disabled for the client_id: " + clientId); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Log Improvement Suggestion No: 2
Suggested change
| if (!isApplicationAccessible(clientId, appTenant)) { | |
| throw new InvalidOAuthClientException("Application is disabled for the client_id: " + clientId); | |
| if (!isApplicationAccessible(clientId, appTenant)) { | |
| log.warn("Application is disabled for client_id: " + clientId); |
Comment on lines
+666
to
+668
| private static boolean isApplicationAccessible(String clientId, String appTenant) | ||
| throws IdentityOAuth2Exception { | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Log Improvement Suggestion No: 3
Suggested change
| private static boolean isApplicationAccessible(String clientId, String appTenant) | |
| throws IdentityOAuth2Exception { | |
| private static boolean isApplicationAccessible(String clientId, String appTenant) | |
| throws IdentityOAuth2Exception { | |
| if (log.isDebugEnabled()) { | |
| log.debug("Checking application accessibility for client_id: " + clientId); | |
| } |
Comment on lines
+678
to
+679
| if (!serviceProvider.isApplicationEnabled()) { | ||
| if (diagnosticLogBuilder != null) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Log Improvement Suggestion No: 4
Suggested change
| if (!serviceProvider.isApplicationEnabled()) { | |
| if (diagnosticLogBuilder != null) { | |
| if (!serviceProvider.isApplicationEnabled()) { | |
| log.warn("Application is disabled for client_id: " + clientId); |
Comment on lines
+685
to
+686
| return false; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Log Improvement Suggestion No: 5
Suggested change
| return false; | |
| } | |
| return false; | |
| } | |
| if (log.isDebugEnabled()) { | |
| log.debug("Application is enabled for client_id: " + clientId); | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
AI Agent Log Improvement Checklist
- The log-related comments and suggestions in this review were generated by an AI tool to assist with identifying potential improvements. Purpose of reviewing the code for log improvements is to improve the troubleshooting capabilities of our products.
- Please make sure to manually review and validate all suggestions before applying any changes. Not every code suggestion would make sense or add value to our purpose. Therefore, you have the freedom to decide which of the suggestions are helpful.
✅ Before merging this pull request:
- Review all AI-generated comments for accuracy and relevance.
- Complete and verify the table below. We need your feedback to measure the accuracy of these suggestions and the value they add. If you are rejecting a certain code suggestion, please mention the reason briefly in the suggestion for us to capture it.
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2942 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 58.31% 58.26% -0.06%
+ Complexity 9098 9064 -34
============================================
Files 669 669
Lines 50263 50343 +80
Branches 11396 11420 +24
============================================
+ Hits 29313 29334 +21
- Misses 16915 16963 +48
- Partials 4035 4046 +11
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
ShanChathusanda93
force-pushed
the
app-validation-branch
branch
from
ade1f30 to
e478437
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Proposed changes in this pull request