You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In that config schema from that old commit, csrfProtection expects to only receive boolean config values, which was a bug that has since been fixed. However, while debugging, we noticed odd behavior that reveals a deeper bug.
If you change the config auditor back to only accept booleans for csrfProtection, then configure a Roosevelt app config in certain ways, the config audit won't fail in cases where it should.
An obscure situation can be triggered to cause the config auditor to pass when it shouldn't.
This was observed with the
csrfProtection
config defined in this old commit:roosevelt/lib/scripts/configAuditor.js
Lines 255 to 257 in 88a3e64
In that config schema from that old commit,
csrfProtection
expects to only receive boolean config values, which was a bug that has since been fixed. However, while debugging, we noticed odd behavior that reveals a deeper bug.If you change the config auditor back to only accept booleans for
csrfProtection
, then configure a Roosevelt app config in certain ways, the config audit won't fail in cases where it should.Example configs:
If you configure a Roosevelt app config with:
It will not fail the config auditor, even though it should, because an object is not a boolean.
However if you give the app this config instead:
That will fail the config auditor. It's unclear why the two exemptions objects with different entries trigger different behavior.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: