while running the vorto dashboard im getting the following error
JWT expired, getting new Token Wed Aug 26 2020 07:38:56 GMT+0100 (BST)... StatusCodeError: 401 -
{"status":401,"error":"gateway:authentication.failed","message":"Multiple authentication
mechanisms were applicable but none succeeded.","description":"For a successful authentication
see the following suggestions: { The JSON Web Token is not valid. },
{ Please provide a valid JWT in the authorization header prefixed with 'Bearer ' }."
The contents of config.json is as follows
{
"client_id": "xxxxxxxxxxx",
"client_secret": "xxxxxxxxxxxx",
"scope": "xxxxxxxxxx",
"intervalMS": 10000
}
Tried with setting the contents of config.json as environment variables. Then also im getting same error. Screenshot of web front end on accessing localhost:8080 is attached
Tried with the following links Error running Vorto Dashboard for Bosch iot suite. But still its not working. Please help me in solving this issue
I have discussed the matter internally to Bosch (disclaimer: I am an employee).
After discussing with the Bosch Suite Auth team, here is a summary of what happened.
The Suite Auth team recently transitioned from Keycloack to Hydra for their authentication technology
The relevant bit here is that previously, the scopes passed to the token request were ignored
The Vorto Dashboard app had been passing the wrong key for the scope parameter all along, when requesting a token, but it was ignored
Now that this parameter is relevant, the (incorrect) notation was not failing to produce a token, but obtained one that was not suitable to authorize with Bosch IoT Things, because it did not contain the appropriate scope
In turn, fixing this key produces a token that successfully authorizes with Bosch IoT Things
If you're in a hurry, you can check out this branch with the fix (it's literally an 8 characters change set).
Otherwise, you can monitor this GitHub ticket for closure - I will close it when the fix is merged to the master branch of the Vorto Examples project.
Related
I have been having a long and frustrating experience trying to get AASA to work for webcredentials. My goal here is to allow usernames and passwords to be stored in the iOS keychain.
I did have this working on a root domain the other week but it is not sufficient for my scenario as I will explain. It didn't work for me straight away I have to say but it eventually started working after a clean build so I thought this was the issue then but now I am not so sure.
I am using Expo with EAS build. We have a multi-tenant application. From a single codebase we deploy to multiple apps in the store. All are on the same team ID but they are separate applications and use separate credentials, nothing is shared.
I am confident my apps textContentType of username and password on my TextFields is correct as this has not changed from when I managed to get it working originally and I have checked it countless times.
Expectation
For the "Save Password" prompt to be displayed after login. What I have noticed however is when going to store a password manually using "add password" via iCloudKeychain from the keyboard accessory this does accurately show the correct "TENANT_SUBDOMAIN.example.com". I find this confusing.
Goal Scenario
I am hosting a site on Netlify. I have it setup to support wildcard subdomains with a LetsEncrypt provisioned wildcard SSL certificate. I then have edge functions which change the content of my index.html and apple-app-site-association file dynamically based on the requested subdomain.
I have added the Associated Domains capability to my provisioning profile.
I am using the latest Expo 47 and EAS build. I have added in the appropriate associated domains configuration and I can see this when introspecting my entitlements under com.apple.developer.associated-domains and it is correct.
I am using TestFlight for testing. I am doing a --clean-build on EAS every time and I also increase the runtime version. I have also tried manually refreshing credentials outside of the build process which does this automatically. This must be using the correct provisioning profile otherwise I would get a build failure as the requested entitlements wouldn't match.
The AASA file is currently hosted just in the .well-known directory. I have tried using the root and also tried using both. There are no redirects taking place.
I am aware the AASA file is pulled on application installation and update. I repeatedly remove the apps and then reboot my phone in an attempt to reset any device caches.
The content-type of the file is application/json and I have confirmed this using developer tools in the browser.
There is no robots.txt or anything blocking the request from an infrastructure perspective. There are no additional firewalls or geo restricted access as I am just using plain Netlify to host this, nothing fancy.
I am confident the Team ID and bundle IDs are correct in the AASA file.
I remove the content-length header in the Edge function so it is correctly calculated by the network instead and I have confirmed this using curl.
When I check the file using https://app-site-association.cdn-apple.com/a/v1/site.example.com Apple has the correct file cached on it's CDN so I would expect it to work.
I added in an applinks section so I could use the Apple App Search API validation tool and the Branch.io AASA verification tool to verify correctness. Branch.io says the file is fine and Apple says it's fine also but because the App has not been deployed to the store yet I see Error no apps with domain entitlements. From what I can tell this is normal in development and makes sense as it uses the current released version of the app to verify the deep link configuration. So to me this means Apple can parse the file correctly.
When I stream my device console logs; on install I can see the AASA requesting the correct domains. I see no errors on swcd I just see the Beginning data task AASA-XXXX with the correct domains.
When I run Charles proxy on my phone with a verified SSL installation (also reinstalled a few times now) I do not see quite what I would expect - but the device logs seem to imply it is doing the correct thing. When I view the app-site-association... URL requests in Charles there is one per application install which is correct. The request is marked as Unknown and when I look at the request the host is shown but as you would expect from SSL I see no path. The info says METHOD: CONNECT with Error - Input Error: EOF. This is the only error I see, I am not sure if it is a red herring and something to do with Charles. Given the error as you expect there is no body in the request or response. It is worth noting in general testing I have no VPN enabled and I have do not have Private Relay enabled in my iOS settings.
When I perform a sysdiagnose I see the following at the timestamp in my console log in the swcutil_show.txt device log. This looks correct in comparison to other apps webcredentials and applinks services I see there and I see no errors:
Service: webcredentials
App ID: MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios
App Version: 1.0
App PI: <LSPersistentIdentifier 0x141816200> { v = 0, t = 0x8, u = 0x1e7c, db = 0094F7C4-3078-41A2-A33E-79D5A62C80A6, {length = 8, bytes = 0x7c1e000000000000} }
Domain: CORRECT_SUBDOMAIN.example.app
User Approval: unspecified
Site/Fmwk Approval: approved
Flags:
Last Checked: 2022-12-09 14:14:32 +0000
Next Check: 2022-12-14 14:03:00 +0000
Service: applinks
App ID: MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios
App Version: 1.0
App PI: <LSPersistentIdentifier 0x13fd38d00> { v = 0, t = 0x8, u = 0x219c, db = 0094F7C4-3078-41A2-A33E-79D5A62C80A6, {length = 8, bytes = 0x9c21000000000000} }
Domain: CORRECT_SUBDOMAIN.example.app
Patterns: {"/":"*"}
User Approval: unspecified
Site/Fmwk Approval: approved
Flags:
Last Checked: 2022-12-13 13:13:23 +0000
Next Check: 2022-12-18 13:01:51 + 0000
At end of file:
MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios: 8 bytes
(This seems correct for all apps)
Other Scenario
I have tried setting this up using an apex on another domain which hasn't been seen before by Apple. I have tried using a subdomain with a root domain serving the same content and I have tried the subdomain and root domain on their own. I have also tried not using the Edge functions and having static files but to no avail.
When I do this I ensure I wait for the Apple CDN to catch up and remove/add entries prior to deleting the apps, rebooting my device, and reinstalling to test.
AASA File
AASA content comes back with the correct payload and Content-Type: application/json and Content-Length headers, both from Apples CDN and the origin. When I had this somehow working in my initial test it was on a root domain and I did not have an applinks section, this was only added so I could use the verification tools for universal links.
I am not sending back different content or duplicated content and I block the www subdomain - I have also tried it with a www subdomain for the record.
{
"applinks": {
"details": [
{
"appIDs": [
"MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios"
],
"components": [
{
"#": "no_universal_links",
"exclude": true,
"comment": "Matches any URL with a fragment that equals no_universal_links and instructs the system not to open it as a universal link."
}
]
}
]
},
"webcredentials": {
"apps": [
"MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios"
]
}
}
I have also tried this with the older format:
{
"applinks": {
"apps": [],
"details": [
{
"appID": "MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios",
"paths": [
"*"
]
}
]
},
"webcredentials": {
"apps": [
"MYTEAMID.com.cf.example.b2c.ios"
]
}
}
associatedDomains iOS. expo config
associatedDomains: [
`webcredentials:${SUBDOMAIN}.example.app`,
`applinks:${SUBDOMAIN}.example.app`,
],
Help :)
I have been trying to get this to work for a long time now and I am completely out of ideas. If anybody has any suggestions I would really appreciate it. I am very confused how the devices request seems correct and the CDN content is correct but it is still not working. It's worth also reiterating that I need to have different subdomains for each tenant as the credentials must not be shared across apps so the keychain->domain association store must be different.
I am wondering if it's the LetsEncrypt wildcard SSL certificate but I wouldn't expect it to verify and for Apple to cache the file if this was the case. It seems very unlikely to me but it is the only thing I haven't tried at this point.
Many Thanks,
Mark
I have been reading old blocks from the solana JSON RPC API (using python), but now I am trying to subscribe to the block production on the solana network (to get up live updates).
I tried to pull updates through the RPC API using
{"jsonrpc": "2.0", "id": "1", "method": "blockSubscribe", "params": ["all"]}
This doesn't work, with response: 'code': -32601, 'message': 'Method not found'
Looking at the docs.solana.com info, it states that:
This subscription is unstable and only available if the validator was
started with the --rpc-pubsub-enable-block-subscription flag. The
format of this subscription may change in the future
I assume this means I need to run solana-test-validator --rpc-pubsub-enable-block-subscription, but this just returns:
error: Found argument '--rpc-pubsub-enable-block-subscription' which wasn't expected, or isn't valid in this context
Did you mean --rpc-port?
USAGE:
solana-test-validator --ledger <DIR> --rpc-port <PORT>
I can't seem to find any more information on how to subscribe to blocks using the RPC.
Any ideas or help with what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks in advance
You are correct that the validator has to run --rpc-pubsub-enable-block-subscription. For mainnet-beta usage, it is recommended to either find a private rpc with this enabled or have your own. Please note though, the method is marked currently as unstable.
It looks like rpc-pubsub-enable-block-subscription is not available on the test validator. You can find the full command list here.
This subscription is unstable and only available if the validator was started with the --rpc-pubsub-enable-block-subscription flag. The format of this subscription may change in the future
I am trying to make a simple python script that posts a text message to a facebook page using requests.
I actually managed to succeed this feat, however, when I add the same logic to a bigger project of mine, a certain request returns a different json.
According to this page https://developers.facebook.com/docs/pages/access-tokens I can exchange the short lived user token I generate in the graph explorer tool for a long lived one that lasts 60 days. This worked for me until now. When I run the same functions, same variables on another .py file that includes other logic as well the request does not return this line:
"expires_in": SECONDS-UNTIL-TOKEN-EXPIRES
And of course later on if I continue the logic and use the token it returns (which is the same) for, let's say, a make_post function the request prints
{'error': {'message': '(#200) If posting to a group, requires app being installed in the group, and \\\n either publish_to_groups permission with user token, or both manage_pages \\\n and publish_pages permission with page token; If posting to a page, \\\n requires both manage_pages and publish_pages as an admin with \\\n sufficient administrative permission', 'type': 'OAuthException', 'code': 200, 'fbtrace_id': 'AqYMMeOcOniWAGgEEtsEURs'}
Why does it not successfully return, the user token had not expired and it has the requires rights. Furthermore I tested this in a smaller .py file and it worked.
Another thing I found out here https://developers.facebook.com/support/bugs/523165725596520/?join_id=f1ff8392b49675c here is that other people have actually reported the same issue but it has been closed as 'intended by design' however there is no information of a solution.
Running the request in my browser also does not work correctly.
Do you have any ideas? I am completely clueless.
Thank you very much in advance
As #CBroe in a comment said, the expires_in didn't have anything to do with my error. The token it returns if valid. The issue I had later on had to do with the url I was parsing
I was able to connect and upload videos using the library but when I deleted the app connection on Vimeo.com (as a test) the app didn't authorize again.
the upload looks like it's working but nothing is uploaded as the app is no longer connected.
I deleted the app on the phone and restarted but it still won't re-authorize the app.
This comes up in the output:
Vimeo upload state : Executing
Vimeo upload state : Finished
Invalid http status code for download task.
And this is in OldVimeoUpload.swift: ( didn't include the actual access code!)
import Foundation
class OldVimeoUpload: VimeoUpload
{
static var VIMEO_ACCESS_TOKEN :String! // = "there's a string of numbers here"
static let sharedInstance = OldVimeoUpload(backgroundSessionIdentifier: "") { () -> String? in
return VIMEO_ACCESS_TOKEN // See README for details on how to obtain and OAuth token
}
// MARK: - Initialization
override init(backgroundSessionIdentifier: String, authTokenBlock: AuthTokenBlock)
{
super.init(backgroundSessionIdentifier: backgroundSessionIdentifier, authTokenBlock: authTokenBlock)
}
}
It looks like the access token number is commented out. I deleted the 2 forward slashes to see if that would fix it but it didn't.
I spoke too soon.
It sounds like you went to developer.vimeo.com and created an auth token. Used it to upload videos. And then went back to developer.vimeo.com and deleted the auth token.
The app / VimeoUpload will not automatically re-authenticated in this situation. You've killed the token and the app cannot request a new one for you. You'll need to create a new auth token and plug it into the app.
If this is not accurate and you're describing a different issue let us know.
If you inspect the error that's thrown from the failing request I'm guessing you'll see it's a 401 unauthorized related to using an invalid token.
Edit:
Disconnecting your app (as described in your comment below) has the same effect as deleting your auth token from developer.vimeo.com.
Also, VimeoUpload accepts a hardcoded auth token (as you see from the README and your code sample). It will not automatically re-authenticate, probably ever.
If you'd like to handle authentication in your app check out VimeoNetworking or VIMNetworking. Either of those libraries can be used to create a variety of authentication flows / scenarios. Still, if a logged in user disconnects or deletes their token, you will need them to deliberately re-authenticate (i.e. you will need to build that flow yourself). In that case, the user has explicitly stated that they don't want the app to be able to access information on their behalf. It would go against our security contract with them to automatically re-authenticate somehow.
Does that make sense?
I was wondering if Wirecloud offers complete support for object storage with FI-WARE Testbed instead of Fi-lab. I have successfully integrated Wirecloud with Testbed and have developed a set of widgets that are able to upload/download files to specific containers in Fi-lab with success. However, the same widgets do not seem to work in Fi-lab, as i get an error 500 when trying to retrieve the auth tokens (also with the well known object-storage-test widget) containing the following response:
SyntaxError: Unexpected token
at Object.parse (native)
at create (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/controllers/Token.js:343:25)
at callbacks (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:164:37)
at param (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:138:11)
at pass (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:145:5)
at Router._dispatch (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:173:5)
at Object.router (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/lib/router/index.js:33:10)
at next (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/node_modules/connect/lib/proto.js:195:15)
at Object.handle (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/server.js:31:5)
at next (/home/fiware/fi-ware-keystone-proxy/node_modules/express/node_modules/connect/lib/proto.js:195:15)
I noticed that the token provided in the beggining (to start the transaction) is
token: Object
id: "%fiware_token%"
Any idea regarding what might have gone wrong?
The WireCloud instance available at FI-WARE's testbed is always the latest stable version while the FI-LAB instance is currently outdated, we're working on updating it as soon as possible. One of the things that changes between those versions is the Object Storage API, so sorry for the inconvenience as you will not be able to use widgets/operators using the Object Storage in both environments.
Anyway, the response you were obtaining seems to indicate the object storage instance you are accessing is not working properly, so you will need to send an email to one of the available mail lists for getting help (fiware-testbed-help or fiware-lab-help) telling what is happening to you (remember to include your account information as there are several object storage nodes and ones can be up and the others down).
Regarding the strange request body:
"token": {
id: "%fiware_token%"
}
This behaviour is normal, as the WireCloud client code has no direct access to the IdM token of the user. It's the WireCloud's proxy which replaces the %fiware_token% pattern with the correct value.