Added rate-limiting facility #163

kdhttps · 2020-11-23T15:31:05Z

Used express-rate-limit package, currently fetching configurations from production.js file

closes #139

codecov · 2020-11-23T15:56:52Z

Codecov Report

Merging #163 (66b04cd) into master (e6b0031) will increase coverage by 0.54%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #163      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.82%   69.36%   +0.54%     
==========================================
  Files          31       32       +1     
  Lines         680      692      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits          468      480      +12     
  Misses        212      212

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
config/default.js	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
config/production.js	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
config/test.js	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
server/app-factory.js	`94.11% <100.00%> (+0.56%)`	⬆️
server/app.js	`95.12% <100.00%> (+0.12%)`	⬆️
server/utils/rate-limiter.js	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update e6b0031...659db5a. Read the comment docs.

christian-hawk

Very nice that you created BDD scenario integration tests for new feature 👏🏻
I just need to understand (as commented) how it behaves.

I would also request the following change:

unit test rate-limiter.test.js for rate-limiter.js can be created (actually using TDD the test should be created before developing), for example:
I will also add TDD metodology examples, to illustrate the metodology applied to the current simple file.

assert that window exists (TDD: test will break, so now you can create the first line of code in rate-limiter.js: let window, test passes...)
assert that window is a const (TDD: test will break, so now to pass you can just const window = '', test passes)
assert that window has the same value from default.js, test.js or production.js (TDD: test break... test will pass when you rafactor const window to receive config.get..., test passes)
assert that max exists (TDD: test will break, so now you can create let max, test passes...)
assert that max is a const (TDD: test will break, so now to pass you can just const max = '', test passes)
assert that max has the same value from default.js, test.js or production.js (TDD: test break... test will pass when you rafactor const max to receive config.get...)
assert that rateLimit exists (TDD: after this test we create rateLimit (like let rateLimit) in rate-limiter.js file, so test passes)
assert that rateLimit is strict equal require('express-rate-limit') (TDD: test will break, cause rateLimit has not this value. So now we refactor existing rateLimit to const rateLimit = require('express-rate-limit') - test passes
assert that rateLimiter is equal rateLimit){...}. (TDD: test will break, so you code = rateLimit({...})), test passes

I hope my comments are useful.

server/rate-limiter.js

test/features/steps/rate-limiting-steps.js

test/features/rate-limiting.feature

test/app-factory.test.js

kdhttps · 2020-11-25T11:47:50Z

unit test rate-limiter.test.js for rate-limiter.js can be created (actually using TDD the test should be created before developing), for example:
I will also add TDD metodology examples, to illustrate the metodology applied to the current simple file.

@christian-hawk my friend, Actually my first code was like

const rateLimit = require('express-rate-limit')
const config = require('config')

const rateLimiter = rateLimit({
  windowMs: config.get('rateLimitWindowMs'),
  max: config.get('rateLimitMaxRequestAllow'),
  message: `You have exceeded the max requests`,
  headers: true
})

I covered test-cases about it in app-factory.test.js
but
before push code, I though to change message and due to message, I took extra two variables and forgot to cover test cases about new code refactor, my mistake.

I pushed review changes, please review again and thank you for great review :)

christian-hawk

Nicely done.
Now we just need to resolver the cucumber's 2 conversations and we are done!

Also please check if https://github.com/GluuFederation/gluu-passport/runs/1453194618 this codacy issue is a false-positive?

test/features/rate-limiting.feature

test/features/steps/rate-limiting-steps.js

used express-rate-limit package, currently fetching configurations from production.js file feat #139

christian-hawk

Still have an unresolved conversation from former review to dinamically tests endpoints behaviour.

kdhttps · 2020-12-09T07:05:38Z

@christian-hawk what you think now? #163 (comment)

… 139_feat_rate_limiting

re #139

… 139_feat_rate_limiting

christian-hawk

Well done made.
We just need to do the correct features and steps dynamically

test/features/steps/enpoint-metric-steps.js

test/rate-limiter.test.js

test/app-factory.test.js

christian-hawk · 2020-12-11T15:55:17Z

I'm changing this to draft as it's still a work in progress.

christian-hawk

Very nice structure.
Please check priority comments on rate-limiting-steps.js. I understand after that we are done.

server/app.js

test/features/steps/rate-limiting-steps.js

test/helper.js

re #139

…configuration file values As those are not blackbox tests, we should test against the static values from configuration file

christian-hawk · 2021-01-11T16:15:50Z

here we can see that rate limiting counting is not being reset for each scenario example, I'm working on that.

I also changed to static config values, you got a point here.

After thinking I also understand that changing config file may go to our blackbox stage-testing instead of our whitebox functional tests (here).

…ting / reset

…heck So we can test against static responses (/token generates a token)

…leware

… step files

christian-hawk · 2021-01-11T18:44:08Z

run tests

christian-hawk · 2021-01-11T18:49:00Z

As you requested, I did the changes for accurate tests.
Now we need only to check codacy reports and maybe create a helper or cucumber setup.js to avoid dry.

christian-hawk · 2021-01-11T19:26:32Z

run tests

christian-hawk · 2021-01-11T19:31:45Z

run tests

… hooks test #139

re #139

Done Changes

christian-hawk · 2021-01-18T15:46:12Z

run tests

christian-hawk · 2021-01-18T16:34:43Z

@kdhttps
IDP initiated flow failed:

13:04:45 ============================================================================
13:04:45 
13:04:45 - Provider type: IDP
13:04:45 - Type: passport-saml
13:04:45 - Flow: idp-initiated
13:04:45 - Passport Provider ID: saml-idpinit
13:04:45 TODO: Creating Trust Relation on t3.techno24x7.com automatically
13:04:45 
13:04:45 - User data:
13:04:45 USER_NAME: hansdoe
13:04:45 USER_PASSWORD: test123
13:04:45 USER_MAIL: [email protected]
13:04:45 USER_GIVEN: hans
13:04:45 USER_SUR: doe
13:04:45 
13:04:45 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
13:04:45 RUNNING BLACKBOX BDT TESTS:
13:04:45 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
13:04:45 
13:04:45 Feature: accessing protected content # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:1
13:04:50 
13:04:50   Scenario: Not authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:3
13:04:50     Given that user exists in provider                       # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37
13:04:50     When user tries to access protected content page         # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:126
13:04:54     Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:140
13:05:08 
13:05:08   Scenario: Authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:9
13:05:08     Given that user exists in provider                   # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37
13:05:08     And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42
13:05:25 (None, None, None)
13:05:25       Traceback (most recent call last):
13:05:25         File "/var/lib/jenkins/.cache/pypoetry/virtualenvs/gluu-passport-testing-_NjlDPuR-py3.6/lib/python3.6/site-packages/behave/model.py", line 1329, in run
13:05:25           match.run(runner.context)
13:05:25         File "/var/lib/jenkins/.cache/pypoetry/virtualenvs/gluu-passport-testing-_NjlDPuR-py3.6/lib/python3.6/site-packages/behave/matchers.py", line 98, in run
13:05:25           self.func(context, *args, **kwargs)
13:05:25         File "tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py", line 121, in user_authenticates
13:05:25           assert context.web.current_url.startswith(context.base_url)
13:05:25       AssertionError
13:05:25 
13:05:26     When user tries to access protected content page     # None
13:05:26     Then user should access protected content            # None
13:05:26 
13:05:26 
13:05:26 Failing scenarios:
13:05:26   tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:9  Authenticated user access protected content
13:05:26 
13:05:26 0 features passed, 1 failed, 0 skipped
13:05:26 1 scenario passed, 1 failed, 0 skipped
13:05:26 4 steps passed, 1 failed, 2 skipped, 0 undefined
13:05:26 Took 0m29.508s
13:05:26 entered teardown...

Basically it says we are not getting in the desired URL at this point.
Would you test the flow manually?

kdhttps · 2021-01-18T17:09:53Z

Basically it says we are not getting in the desired URL at this point.
Would you test the flow manually?

Sure, I'll test it

kdhttps · 2021-02-01T14:09:34Z

run tests

kdhttps · 2021-02-01T16:49:51Z

run tests

kdhttps · 2021-02-01T17:42:53Z

Test are passing on my local machine. so we can merge this PR. @christian-hawk may I merge this PR??

PLEASE DO NOT INTERRUPT
============================================================================
Configuration is loading from test.conf file
============================================================================
Setting up environment....
PASSPORT_HOST=xxxx
PASSPORT_IP=xxxx
PROVIDER_HOST=xxxx
PROVIDER_IP=xxxxx
PROVIDER_SNAPSHOT_ID=xxxxx
CLIENT_HOST=dev.xxxx
API_CLIENT_ID=5aba39e9-xxxx
API_CLIENT_SECRET=xxxx
LATEST_DEV_SNAPSHOT_ID=xxx
LATEST_STABLE_SNAPSHOT_ID=xx
============================================================================
create_drplet=false
run_tests=true
  % Total    % Received % Xferd  Average Speed   Time    Time     Time  Current
                                 Dload  Upload   Total   Spent    Left  Speed
100   299  100   202  100    97    108     52  0:00:01  0:00:01 --:--:--   161
{}
Creating test user on xxxxx...
Token generated:xxxx
Error creating user, please check.
response status: 500
reponse: b''
Setting up test client with pre-selected provider saml-default...
https://xxxx/configuration
{
  "provider_id": "saml-default"
}
============================================================================

STARTING: PASSPORT-SAML-DEFAULT

============================================================================

- Provider type: IDP
- Type: passport-saml
- Flow: default
- Passport Provider ID: saml-default
TODO: Creating Trust Relation on xxxx automatically

- User data:
USER_NAME: johndoe22
USER_PASSWORD: test123
USER_MAIL: [email protected]
USER_GIVEN: john
USER_SUR: doe

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUNNING BLACKBOX BDT TESTS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature: accessing protected content # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:1

  Scenario: Not authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:3
    Given that user exists in provider                       # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    When user tries to access protected content page         # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 9.524s
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148 8.016s

  Scenario: Authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:9
    Given that user exists in provider                   # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42 32.119s
    When user tries to access protected content page     # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 5.172s
    Then user should access protected content            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:168 0.045s

1 feature passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
2 scenarios passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
7 steps passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped, 0 undefined
Took 0m54.877s

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLACKBOX BDT TESTS FINISHED FOR TEST CASE: PASSPORT-SAML-DEFAULT
============================================================================
Deleting test users on xxx...
User deleted from idp/oidc provider via API.
Creating test user on xxx...
Token generated: 39deca64-c349-41f3-ba42-06b644ce79f3
User created with success via API...
b'{"inum":"3e7e5a9c-c005-48e4-a232-c0c212ded3d9","surName":"doe","givenName":"john","email":"[email protected]","password":null,"userName":"josephdoe","displayName":"josephdoe","creationDate":1612169752219,"status":"ACTIVE"}'
Setting up test client with pre-selected provider saml-emailreq...
https://dev.techno24x7.com/configuration
{
  "provider_id": "saml-emailreq"
}
============================================================================

STARTING: PASSPORT-SAML-DEFAULT-EMAILREQ

============================================================================

- Provider type: IDP
- Type: passport-saml
- Flow: default emailreq
- Passport Provider ID: saml-emailreq
TODO: Creating Trust Relation on xxx automatically

- User data:
USER_NAME: josephdoe
USER_PASSWORD: test123
USER_MAIL: [email protected]
USER_GIVEN: john
USER_SUR: doe

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUNNING BLACKBOX BDT TESTS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature: accessing protected content # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:1

  Scenario: Not authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:3
    Given that user exists in provider                       # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    When user tries to access protected content page         # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 6.709s
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148 8.013s

  Scenario: Authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:9
    Given that user exists in provider                   # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42 39.887s
    When user tries to access protected content page     # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 5.160s
    Then user should access protected content            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:168 0.075s

1 feature passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
2 scenarios passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
7 steps passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped, 0 undefined
Took 0m59.844s

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLACKBOX BDT TESTS FINISHED FOR TEST CASE: PASSPORT-SAML-DEFAULT-EMAILREQ
============================================================================
Deleting test users on xxx...
User deleted from idp/oidc provider via API.
Creating test user on xxx...
Token generated: 417061f8-21f1-4b21-8360-68973db7ce47
User created with success via API...
b'{"inum":"186fc964-5d4b-4cc3-be86-7458b67594e9","surName":"doe","givenName":"john","email":"[email protected]","password":null,"userName":"josephdoe2","displayName":"josephdoe2","creationDate":1612169825885,"status":"ACTIVE"}'
Setting up test client with pre-selected provider saml-emaillink...
https://dev.techno24x7.com/configuration
{
  "provider_id": "saml-emaillink"
}
============================================================================

STARTING: PASSPORT-SAML-DEFAULT-EMAILLINK

============================================================================

- Provider type: IDP
- Type: passport-saml
- Flow: default emaillink
- Passport Provider ID: saml-emaillink
TODO: Creating Trust Relation on xxx automatically

- User data:
USER_NAME: josephdoe2
USER_PASSWORD: test123
USER_MAIL: [email protected]
USER_GIVEN: john
USER_SUR: doe

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUNNING BLACKBOX BDT TESTS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature: accessing protected content # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:1

  Scenario: Not authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:3
    Given that user exists in provider                       # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    When user tries to access protected content page         # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 6.785s
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148 8.019s

  Scenario: Authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:9
    Given that user exists in provider                   # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42 28.696s
    When user tries to access protected content page     # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 5.177s
    Then user should access protected content            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:168 0.060s

1 feature passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
2 scenarios passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
7 steps passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped, 0 undefined
Took 0m48.737s

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLACKBOX BDT TESTS FINISHED FOR TEST CASE: PASSPORT-SAML-DEFAULT-EMAILLINK
============================================================================
Deleting test users on xxx...
User deleted from idp/oidc provider via API.
Creating test user on xxx...
Token generated: c9b9bc67-be6b-4d32-a83e-4a5591e7d6db
User created with success via API...
b'{"inum":"7646dd27-4047-49a6-9b86-1e9b464c9af2","surName":"doe","givenName":"hans","email":"[email protected]","password":null,"userName":"hansdoe","displayName":"hansdoe","creationDate":1612169888451,"status":"ACTIVE"}'
Setting up test client with pre-selected provider saml-idpinit...
https://dev.techno24x7.com/configuration
{
  "provider_id": "saml-idpinit"
}
============================================================================

STARTING: PASSPORT-SAML-IDP-INITIATED

============================================================================

- Provider type: IDP
- Type: passport-saml
- Flow: idp-initiated
- Passport Provider ID: saml-idpinit
TODO: Creating Trust Relation on xxx automatically

- User data:
USER_NAME: hansdoe
USER_PASSWORD: test123
USER_MAIL: [email protected]
USER_GIVEN: hans
USER_SUR: doe

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RUNNING BLACKBOX BDT TESTS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Feature: accessing protected content # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:1

  Scenario: Not authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:3
    Given that user exists in provider                       # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    When user tries to access protected content page         # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 10.193s
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148
    Then user should be redirected to login page             # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:148 8.015s

  Scenario: Authenticated user access protected content  # tests/behaver/features/protected-content.feature:9
    Given that user exists in provider                   # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:37 0.000s
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42
    And user is authenticated                            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:42 31.471s
    When user tries to access protected content page     # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:133 6.374s
    Then user should access protected content            # tests/behaver/features/steps/protected-content.py:168 0.113s

1 feature passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
2 scenarios passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped
7 steps passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped, 0 undefined
Took 0m56.167s

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

BLACKBOX BDT TESTS FINISHED FOR TEST CASE: PASSPORT-SAML-IDP-INITIATED
============================================================================
Deleting test users on xxx...
User deleted from idp/oidc provider via API.
ALL TEST FINISHED.
=====================================================================
Deleting droplets...
finished with success!!!
entered teardown...
EXIT detected with exit status 0

christian-hawk · 2021-02-01T17:44:44Z

Just a note: as jenkins automated tests are in alpha, when we find jenkins problem we run tests locally and merge.

… 139_feat_rate_limiting

kdhttps requested a review from christian-hawk November 23, 2020 15:31

kdhttps self-assigned this Nov 23, 2020

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch from 152b4b8 to 51dbe48 Compare November 23, 2020 15:55

christian-hawk suggested changes Nov 24, 2020

View reviewed changes

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch from 51dbe48 to 29669de Compare November 25, 2020 11:38

kdhttps requested a review from christian-hawk November 25, 2020 11:47

christian-hawk suggested changes Nov 25, 2020

View reviewed changes

test/features/rate-limiting.feature Show resolved Hide resolved

test/features/steps/rate-limiting-steps.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

christian-hawk mentioned this pull request Nov 25, 2020

Not able to stop server from outside app.js - untestable #168

Open

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch from 29669de to d2b320a Compare November 30, 2020 13:26

kdhttps requested a review from christian-hawk November 30, 2020 13:34

kdhttps mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2020

fix(app-factory.js): fix location undefine and req.flash function problem #175

Merged

feat(app-factory.js): added rate-limiting facility

51b6ba3

used express-rate-limit package, currently fetching configurations from production.js file feat #139

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch from d2b320a to 51b6ba3 Compare December 2, 2020 07:28

christian-hawk suggested changes Dec 5, 2020

View reviewed changes

kdhttps added 3 commits December 10, 2020 13:56

Merge branch 'master' of github.com:GluuFederation/gluu-passport into…

8c3814f

… 139_feat_rate_limiting

refactor: updated test cases and review fixes

87eaa3b

re #139

Merge branch 'master' of github.com:GluuFederation/gluu-passport into…

d1e623c

… 139_feat_rate_limiting

kdhttps requested a review from christian-hawk December 11, 2020 12:37

christian-hawk suggested changes Dec 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

test/features/steps/enpoint-metric-steps.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

test/rate-limiter.test.js Show resolved Hide resolved

test/app-factory.test.js Show resolved Hide resolved

christian-hawk marked this pull request as draft December 11, 2020 15:54

kdhttps requested a review from christian-hawk December 16, 2020 13:23

christian-hawk previously requested changes Dec 16, 2020

View reviewed changes

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch 2 times, most recently from adf0371 to 0005a8c Compare December 17, 2020 12:16

refactor: updated test cases to run with dynamic scenarios

6210dca

re #139

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch from 0005a8c to 6210dca Compare December 17, 2020 12:20

christian-hawk added 2 commits January 11, 2021 15:41

test(rate-limiting.feature): change behaviour to test against static …

7b2141e

…configuration file values As those are not blackbox tests, we should test against the static values from configuration file

test(rate-limiting.feature): add more examples to check behaviour

939e2f5

christian-hawk added 6 commits January 11, 2021 17:44

test(app-factory): store initialized rateLimit on app for further tes…

5c97307

…ting / reset

test(rate-limiting.feature): add tag and changed endpoint to health-c…

1d96230

…heck So we can test against static responses (/token generates a token)

test(rate-limiting-steps): add working hook and correct reseting midd…

8a15ca1

…leware

test(rate-limiting.feature): add tag to scenarios

02686bb

test(enpoint-metric-steps): changed before hook to act like the other…

79d220e

… step files

test(endpoint-metric-steps): fix url path

c3360f0

test(steps.js): updated cucumber-js and used BeforeStep and AfterStep…

8783b41

… hooks test #139

kdhttps marked this pull request as ready for review January 12, 2021 09:34

kdhttps requested a review from christian-hawk January 12, 2021 09:34

refactor: refactor test cases to remove duplication

b9b103f

re #139

kdhttps force-pushed the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch from 3ef9db3 to b9b103f Compare January 12, 2021 09:40

christian-hawk approved these changes Feb 1, 2021

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'master' of github.com:GluuFederation/gluu-passport into…

659db5a

… 139_feat_rate_limiting

kdhttps merged commit 693da68 into master Feb 1, 2021

christian-hawk deleted the 139_feat_rate_limiting branch October 6, 2021 06:35

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Added rate-limiting facility #163

Added rate-limiting facility #163

kdhttps commented Nov 23, 2020

codecov bot commented Nov 23, 2020 •

edited

Loading

christian-hawk left a comment

kdhttps commented Nov 25, 2020

christian-hawk left a comment •

edited

Loading

christian-hawk left a comment

kdhttps commented Dec 9, 2020

christian-hawk left a comment

christian-hawk commented Dec 11, 2020

christian-hawk left a comment

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 18, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 18, 2021

kdhttps commented Jan 18, 2021 •

edited

Loading

kdhttps commented Feb 1, 2021

kdhttps commented Feb 1, 2021

kdhttps commented Feb 1, 2021

christian-hawk commented Feb 1, 2021

Added rate-limiting facility #163

Added rate-limiting facility #163

Conversation

kdhttps commented Nov 23, 2020

codecov bot commented Nov 23, 2020 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

christian-hawk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdhttps commented Nov 25, 2020

christian-hawk left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

christian-hawk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdhttps commented Dec 9, 2020

christian-hawk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

christian-hawk commented Dec 11, 2020

christian-hawk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 11, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 18, 2021

christian-hawk commented Jan 18, 2021

kdhttps commented Jan 18, 2021 • edited Loading

kdhttps commented Feb 1, 2021

kdhttps commented Feb 1, 2021

kdhttps commented Feb 1, 2021

christian-hawk commented Feb 1, 2021

codecov bot commented Nov 23, 2020 •

edited

Loading

christian-hawk left a comment •

edited

Loading

kdhttps commented Jan 18, 2021 •

edited

Loading