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

feat(middleware-api-key): add new auth middleware #4012

Merged

Conversation

eduardomourar
Copy link
Contributor

@eduardomourar eduardomourar commented Oct 3, 2022

Issue N/A

Description

We will create a new middleware to handle API keys in the context of Smithy generated models (probably not applicable for AWS specific services). The code is based heavily on this PR from the Smithy TypeScript repository.

In order for it to work, we need to ensure the Bearer token middleware succeeds even when the token is not set.

Testing

Unit tests

Additional context


By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

@eduardomourar eduardomourar requested a review from a team as a code owner October 3, 2022 21:00
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch from b96a8bb to 1d8c409 Compare October 3, 2022 21:23
@eduardomourar eduardomourar changed the title feat(middleware-api-key: add new auth middleware feat(middleware-api-key): add new auth middleware Oct 3, 2022
@kuhe kuhe self-assigned this Oct 4, 2022
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch from ecfed07 to 6b856b3 Compare October 5, 2022 15:15
@eduardomourar eduardomourar requested a review from kuhe October 5, 2022 15:16
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch from 6b856b3 to 52c7834 Compare October 5, 2022 21:14
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch 2 times, most recently from 37ccd95 to a14a5b3 Compare October 25, 2022 12:48
@eduardomourar
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have created another PR with formatting issues: #4087

@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch 3 times, most recently from 7f7a613 to a7bab48 Compare October 27, 2022 10:03
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch from a7bab48 to 67fd30e Compare November 1, 2022 20:49
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch 2 times, most recently from 9cd5fe4 to 8db1050 Compare December 14, 2022 10:39
@eduardomourar
Copy link
Contributor Author

eduardomourar commented Dec 14, 2022

@trivikr and @kuhe , could we get this approved and merged, please?

packages/types/src/auth.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/types/src/auth.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@eduardomourar eduardomourar force-pushed the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch from 1ef5489 to d8e9485 Compare December 15, 2022 18:15
We will create a new middleware to handle API keys in the
context of Smithy generated models (probably not
applicable for AWS specific services). The code is based
heavily on [this PR](
smithy-lang/smithy-typescript#473
) from the Smithy TypeScript repository.

In order for it to work, we need to ensure the Bearer token
middleware succeeds even when the `token` is not set.
@eduardomourar
Copy link
Contributor Author

@trivikr , could this be re-approved and merged, please?

@trivikr trivikr merged commit bdf7a59 into aws:main Jan 24, 2023
@eduardomourar eduardomourar deleted the feat/middleware-token-without-default-provider branch January 24, 2023 18:46
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 8, 2023

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs and link to relevant comments in this thread.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 8, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants