Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Display authorization details in authentication web application #7117

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

VimukthiRajapaksha
Copy link

Proposed changes in this pull request

This PR introduces support for displaying authorization details in the authentication web application, specifically enhancing user interaction as per the Rich Authorization Requests (RFC9396) specification.

  • Added functionality to display authorization details within the oauth2_authz.jsp and oauth2_consent.jsp files.

Related Issues

Checklist (for reviewing)

General

  • Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
  • Is the PR labeled correctly?

Functionality

  • Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
  • Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.

Code

  • Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
  • Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
  • Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.

Tests

  • Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
  • If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.
  • If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?

Security

  • Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.
  • Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?
  • Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?
  • Does all branching logic have a default case?
  • Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?
  • Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?

Documentation

  • Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes should be documented.
  • Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented.
  • Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.

@wso2-jenkins-bot
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ No Changeset found

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go.

If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

Refer Release Documentation to learn how to add a changeset.

@@ -192,6 +192,7 @@ under.construction=This page is under construction
by.selecting.following.attributes=By selecting the following attributes you agree to share them with
select.all=Select All
requested.scopes=Obtain permission for
requested.authorization-details=Gain consent for
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's follow the convention for i18n keys.

Also update the other language properties files too.

Suggested change
requested.authorization-details=Gain consent for
requested.authorization.details=Gain consent for

<i aria-hidden="true" class="circle tiny icon primary consent-item-bullet" id="Authorization Details Types"></i>
<div class="content mt-2">
<div class="header light-font">
<%=AuthenticationEndpointUtil.i18n(resourceBundle, "requested.authorization-details")%>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's use the i18n function defined in identity-apps-core/apps/authentication-portal/src/main/webapp/includes/localize.jsp instead.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 13, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 32.02%. Comparing base (7ae5f3a) to head (230e379).
Report is 16 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #7117   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   32.02%   32.02%           
=======================================
  Files          41       41           
  Lines         893      893           
  Branches      220      220           
=======================================
  Hits          286      286           
+ Misses        607      557   -50     
- Partials        0       50   +50     
Flag Coverage Δ
@wso2is/core 32.02% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 14 files with indirect coverage changes

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants