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

add x-ms-enum to security #17426

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2022
Merged

Conversation

ArcturusZhang
Copy link
Member

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Changelog

Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:

  1. What's the purpose of the update?
    • new service onboarding
    • new API version
    • update existing version for new feature
    • update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
    • Other, please clarify
  2. When are you targeting to deploy the new service/feature to public regions? Please provide the date or, if the date is not yet available, the month.
  3. When do you expect to publish the swagger? Please provide date or, the the date is not yet available, the month.
  4. If updating an existing version, please select the specific langauge SDKs and CLIs that must be refreshed after the swagger is published.
    • SDK of .NET (need service team to ensure code readiness)
    • SDK of Python
    • SDK of Java
    • SDK of Js
    • SDK of Go
    • PowerShell
    • CLI
    • Terraform
    • No refresh required for updates in this PR

Contribution checklist:

If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.

ARM API Review Checklist

Applicability: ⚠️

If your changes encompass only the following scenarios, you should SKIP this section, as these scenarios do not require ARM review.

  • Change to data plane APIs
  • Adding new properties
  • All removals

Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:

  • Check this box if any of the following apply to the PR so that label "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added automatically to begin ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays to the manifest.

    • Adding a new service
    • Adding new API(s)
    • Adding a new API version
      -[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you are using OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. More details, refer to the wiki.
  • Ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.

  • If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.

Breaking Change Review Checklist

If any of the following scenarios apply to the PR, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

  • Removing API(s) in a stable version
  • Removing properties in a stable version
  • Removing API version(s) in a stable version
  • Updating API in a stable or public preview version with Breaking Change Validation errors
  • Updating API(s) in public preview over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)

Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.

Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.

@openapi-workflow-bot
Copy link

Hi, @ArcturusZhang Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

  • Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.
  • PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.
  • For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator
  • If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

  • Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vsswagger@microsoft.com

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    [Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks.

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jan 20, 2022

    Swagger Validation Report

    ️️✔️BreakingChange succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.

    ️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

    Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.

    Rule Message
    R2018 - XmsEnumValidation The enum types should have x-ms-enum type extension set with appropriate options.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/serverVulnerabilityAssessments.json#L355
    R2018 - XmsEnumValidation The enum types should have x-ms-enum type extension set with appropriate options.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/serverVulnerabilityAssessments.json#L355
    R4013 - IntegerTypeMustHaveFormat The integer type does not have a format, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L235
    R4013 - IntegerTypeMustHaveFormat The integer type does not have a format, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L235
    R4013 - IntegerTypeMustHaveFormat The integer type does not have a format, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L653
    R4013 - IntegerTypeMustHaveFormat The integer type does not have a format, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L653
    R4013 - IntegerTypeMustHaveFormat The integer type does not have a format, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L725
    R4013 - IntegerTypeMustHaveFormat The integer type does not have a format, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L725
    R4017 - TopLevelResourcesListBySubscription The top-level resource 'AdaptiveNetworkHardening' does not have list by subscription operation, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L327
    R4017 - TopLevelResourcesListBySubscription The top-level resource 'AdaptiveNetworkHardening' does not have list by subscription operation, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L327
    R4017 - TopLevelResourcesListBySubscription The top-level resource 'ServerVulnerabilityAssessment' does not have list by subscription operation, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/serverVulnerabilityAssessments.json#L336
    R4017 - TopLevelResourcesListBySubscription The top-level resource 'ServerVulnerabilityAssessment' does not have list by subscription operation, please add it.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/serverVulnerabilityAssessments.json#L336
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdvancedThreatProtectionProperties' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2019-01-01/advancedThreatProtectionSettings.json#L118
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'Rule' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L240
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'Rule' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L240
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'EffectiveNetworkSecurityGroups' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L287
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'EffectiveNetworkSecurityGroups' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L287
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdaptiveNetworkHardeningProperties' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L303
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdaptiveNetworkHardeningProperties' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L303
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdaptiveNetworkHardening' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L327
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdaptiveNetworkHardening' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L327
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdaptiveNetworkHardeningsList' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L342
    R4037 - MissingTypeObject The schema 'AdaptiveNetworkHardeningsList' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'.
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L342
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/preview/2017-08-01-preview/informationProtectionPolicies.json#L302
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/preview/2017-08-01-preview/informationProtectionPolicies.json#L302
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/preview/2017-08-01-preview/informationProtectionPolicies.json#L302
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/preview/2017-08-01-preview/informationProtectionPolicies.json#L302
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L306
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L306
    R4041 - XmsIdentifierValidation Missing identifier id in array item property
    Location: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/adaptiveNetworkHardenings.json#L318
    ️⚠️Avocado: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
    Rule Message
    ⚠️ MULTIPLE_API_VERSION The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers.
    readme: specification/security/resource-manager/readme.md
    tag: specification/security/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-composite-v3
    ️️✔️~[Staging] ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    ️❌ModelValidation: 10 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
    Rule Message
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "id" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2019-01-01/advancedThreatProtectionSettings.json#L78:15
    ExampleUrl: 2019-01-01/examples/AdvancedThreatProtection/PutAdvancedThreatProtectionSettings_example.json#L6:40
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "name" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2019-01-01/advancedThreatProtectionSettings.json#L83:17
    ExampleUrl: 2019-01-01/examples/AdvancedThreatProtection/PutAdvancedThreatProtectionSettings_example.json#L6:40
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "type" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2019-01-01/advancedThreatProtectionSettings.json#L88:17
    ExampleUrl: 2019-01-01/examples/AdvancedThreatProtection/PutAdvancedThreatProtectionSettings_example.json#L6:40
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "provisioningState" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L450:30
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/CreateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L8:13
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "id" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L78:15
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/CreateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L8:13
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "name" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L83:17
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/CreateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L8:13
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "type" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L88:17
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/CreateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L8:13
    READONLY_PROPERTY_NOT_ALLOWED_IN_REQUEST ReadOnly property "location" cannot be sent in the request
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L154:21
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/CreateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L8:13
    OBJECT_MISSING_REQUIRED_PROPERTY Missing required property: endTimeUtc
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L704:43
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/InitiateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L9:13
    OBJECT_ADDITIONAL_PROPERTIES Additional properties not allowed: duration
    Url: Microsoft.Security/stable/2020-01-01/jitNetworkAccessPolicies.json#L704:43
    ExampleUrl: 2020-01-01/examples/JitNetworkAccessPolicies/InitiateJitNetworkAccessPolicy_example.json#L9:13
    ️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
    ️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There are no breaking changes.
    ️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    There is no credential detected.
    ️️✔️SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail]
    The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
    Rule Message
    "readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v1",
    "details":"Error: Plugin prechecker reported failure."
    "readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v2",
    "details":"Error: Plugin prechecker reported failure."
    "readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-composite-v3",
    "details":"Error: Plugin prechecker reported failure."
    "readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2015-06-preview-only",
    "details":"Error: Plugin prechecker reported failure."
    "readme":"security/resource-manager/readme.md",
    "tag":"package-2020-01-only",
    "details":"Error: Plugin prechecker reported failure."
    ️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
    ️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for SpellCheck.
    ️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
    Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-pipeline-app
    Copy link

    openapi-pipeline-app bot commented Jan 20, 2022

    Swagger Generation Artifacts

    ️️✔️ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️❌SDK Breaking Change Tracking failed [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-net succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-go succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-go-track2 succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-python-track2 warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-js warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-java warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    ️⚠️ azure-resource-manager-schemas warning [Detail]

    Only 0 items are rendered, please refer to log for more details.

    Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?

    @openapi-workflow-bot
    Copy link

    Hi @ArcturusZhang, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of Avocado, semantic validation, model validation, breaking change, lintDiff. If you have any questions, please post your questions in this channel https://aka.ms/swaggersupport.

    TaskHow to fixPriority
    AvocadoFix-AvocadoHigh
    Semantic validationFix-SemanticValidation-ErrorHigh
    Model validationFix-ModelValidation-ErrorHigh
    LintDiffFix-LintDiffhigh
    If you need further help, please feedback via swagger feedback.

    @ghost
    Copy link

    ghost commented Feb 6, 2022

    Hi, @ArcturusZhang. Your PR has no update for 14 days and it is marked as stale PR. If no further update for over 14 days, the bot will close the PR. If you want to refresh the PR, please remove no-recent-activity label.

    @ghost ghost added the no-recent-activity label Feb 6, 2022
    @ArcturusZhang
    Copy link
    Member Author

    /azp run

    @ghost ghost removed the no-recent-activity label Feb 9, 2022
    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @ArcturusZhang
    Copy link
    Member Author

    /azp run

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @ArcturusZhang ArcturusZhang assigned lirenhe and unassigned ruowan Feb 17, 2022
    @lirenhe
    Copy link
    Member

    lirenhe commented Feb 21, 2022

    /azp run

    @azure-pipelines
    Copy link

    Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

    @lirenhe lirenhe merged commit 8aa184e into Azure:main Feb 23, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Projects
    None yet
    Development

    Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

    4 participants