chore(oidc error): expose actual error information #2172
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
Abandoned
Blocked
Bug
Changelog
Added
Changelog
Missing
Changelog
None
Cherry-picking
Database
Dependencies
Dependencies/Renovate
Difficulty
Easy
Difficulty
Hard
Difficulty
Medium
Documentation
Enhancement
Good first issue
Help wanted
Inherited
Matrix/Administration
Matrix/Appservices
Matrix/Auth
Matrix/Client
Matrix/Core
Matrix/E2EE
Matrix/Federation
Matrix/Hydra
Matrix/MSC
Matrix/Media
Matrix/T&S
Merge
Merge/Manual
Merge/Squash
Meta
Meta/CI
Meta/Packaging
Priority
Blocking
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Security
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Invalid
Status
Needs Investigation
Support
bob the builder
No milestone
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set
Reference
continuwuation/continuwuity!2172
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "kyle/continuwuity:no-swallow-oidc-error"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
This pull request exposes the actual error information behind the current generic OIDC "failed to parse" message:
This issue was created by my provider configuration, but made impossible to debug by swallowing error information even at TRACE log level.
Pull request checklist:
mainbranch, and the branch is named something other thanmain.myself, if applicable. This includes ensuring code compiles.
For future readers (perhaps including myself):
The cause of this error, in my case, was configuring a Authentik provider with both signing† and encryption‡.
Un-configuring the encryption key‡ (setting it to "-----") resolved this issue.
† OpenID provider > Signing Key
‡ OpenID provider > Advanced Protocol Settings > Encryption Key
@ -281,3 +281,3 @@.await.map_err(|err| {error!("Failed to exchange OIDC authorization code: {err}");error!("Failed to exchange OIDC authorization code: {err} ({:?})", err);It might be cleaner to just
Yes it is, and still shows the error info
Changing to this
46ed826ad0f1dc218c22f1dc218c226078a0d792