Bad Request on every api call with v1.0.3

[nikned]

after migrating from v1.0.1 to v1.0.3, every API call to the secureAuth instance (v9.2.0) SAExecuter returns back "Bad Request"

Note : The same request(s) works with v1.0.1 .
Note: All provided integration tests are failing with the same issue.

PFA

[ghost]

@nikned Looks like the Extended Date format that was updated is causing this error across the board. Apologies I let this out. I will post a patch, that will be versioned as 1.0.3.1

[ghost]

@nikned I pushed the update, You should have all tests pass with this version.

[nikned]

@sa-rrowcliffe , this issue is fixed now , appreciate it 👍

I see another issue with factorsByUser call ,
user_id : [email protected] ( gmail + trick to create test accounts)
Note : all the API calls search the user successfully in adlds except "factorsByUser" call

I see recent change in v1.0.3 is uncommenting encode() function in public FactorsResponse factorsByUser(String userid) method in SAAccess. This is causing multiple issues ,
here is the scenario:
in v1.0.3 :

1. user_id : [email protected] ==> after encoding ==> test%2BsecureAuth%40gmail.com status 404 , reason=not found
   2.user_id : [email protected] ==>after encoding ==> user_id : testsecureAuth%40gmail.com
   status 401, reason=unauthorized
   3.user_id : [email protected] ==>force skipping encoding ==> user_id : [email protected]
   status 200, reason=ok
   4.user+id : [email protected] ==> force skipping encoding ==> user_id: [email protected] ( note this specific scenario is happening in v1.0.1 as well )
   status 404 , reason=not found.

[ghost]

@nikned We uncommented it for a specific case. Seems it is impacting the more general use cases.
Think we should put a boolean for encoding in the SDK?

[nikned]

@sa-rrowcliffe ,

1. I see in code most of the calls are not doing any encoding for e.g adaptauth,develiverOTPby<sms/email/phone> etc .. and these are working as expected , don't know the case why encoding is needed only on factorsByUser call.
   2.I believe keeping a flag for encoding will give better option to turn on/off on encoding as needed .But still that will not solve the issue with "+" sign or any special characters in the userIds just for the factorsByUser call , where rest of the calls are working as expected. may be a revisit on factorsByUser implementation why its behaving differently and encoding logic along with boolean for encoding ?

[ghost]

@nikned I think we are going to run into a challenge with the + or other special Char, The encoding is really looking for UPN format, the IDP itself isn't parsing the encoding in the form of URLEncoding. I have put in a request into IDP to support URL encoding

[nikned]

@sa-rrowcliffe

Note : other calls are able to fetch user_ids with + signs from adlds . fyi , UPNs on our adlds are "email addresses with plus signs" and calls are working as expected , its only factorsCall which is having this issue.

1. And also i believe instead of making factors request with username in the url
   ==> /users/{username}/factors

like other calls( eg adaptiveauth /api/v1/adaptauth) by passing username as parameters
/users/factors/
Json params
{
"user_id": "",
}
would solve much issues with encoding and other cases.

2. any suggestions how to make + work until the fix is in place ? any work arounds which i can try ?, as this is blocking us moving forward on consuming secureAuth api

[ghost]

@nikned

The + support has to come from IDP. The SDK is just trying to make implementing the rest APIs easier.

Can you open a support case to call out the urlencoding which would be an easier fix then changing the endpoint.

We use path parameters in many parts of the restapi

[nikned]

@sa-rrowcliffe thanks for the clarification , we are going to open support case for this

[nikned]

@sa-rrowcliffe i believe placing a boolean for encoding in the SDK would be still viable at this point thus gives option to turn off to make general usecases work, curretly its breaking most of the general userId formats

[nikned]

@sa-rrowcliffe just to re-check any eta on this fix for adding boolean flag for encoding?