To Switch Basic auth. to Token auth. and viceversa

[SanthoshiBoyina]

Proposed changes

To switch from Basic authentication to Token based authentication and viceversa

Release Notes

Milestone:

Changelog:

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to Zowe Explorer?
Put an x in the boxes that apply

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Updates to Documentation or Tests (if none of the other choices apply)

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This checklist will be used as reference for both the contributor and the reviewer

• I have read the CONTRIBUTOR GUIDANCE wiki
• PR title follows Conventional Commits Guidelines
• PR Description is included
• gif or screenshot is included if visual changes are made
• yarn workspace vscode-extension-for-zowe vscode:prepublish has been executed
• All checks have passed (DCO, Jenkins and Code Coverage)
• I have added unit test and it is passing
• I have added integration test and it is passing
• There is coverage for the code that I have added
• I have tested it manually and there are no regressions found
• I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)
• Any PR dependencies have been merged and published (if appropriate)

Further comments

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 90.19608% with 5 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 93.53%. Comparing base (a320a65) to head (0e62cd0).

Files	Patch %	Lines
packages/zowe-explorer/src/Profiles.ts	91.11%	4 Missing ⚠️
...kages/zowe-explorer/src/utils/ProfileManagement.ts	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2867      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   93.52%   93.53%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         104      104              
  Lines       10891    10942      +51     
  Branches     2354     2372      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits        10186    10235      +49     
- Misses        704      706       +2     
  Partials        1        1              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[JillieBeanSim]

Hey @SanthoshiBoyina, this is a good start for handling this scenario. We can't assume the profile names. I see the node is passed and not being used, we can use it to get the profile with node.getProfile() which will supply the name of the service profile being used. Once we have that we can check if it has any secure properties and change appropriately at the service profile level then if not there the base type profile level. I believe our ZE API has methods in ProfilesCache to get the base profile that is associated with the service profile to obtain the info and name.

[JillieBeanSim]

If label is not being used I don't see a reason to pass to the method.

[JillieBeanSim]

I fell into a bit of a circular issue with login to API ML where login was successful and token written correctly then the connection no longer active message showed, when clicking the button I re-login again and it wrote the tokenType & tokenValue to the zosmf profile. very strange behavior

[likhithanimma1]

1. When I "Login to authentication service" for apimlzosmf the tokenvalue and tokentype are stored in the base profile which is pretty good. But then when "Change the authentication method" is done from token to basic I see the base profile populating with the tokenValue which should be eradicated and the user and pw is being stored in the secure array of apiml profile

2. When the "Login into Authentication service" done twice, for the first time it is populating the base profile with tokenValue and tokenType but for the second time it is populating the profile. Don't know if this comes under scope of this PR. If yes, should be handled.

[JillieBeanSim]

I recorded some videos of what I am seeing with this branch

Screen.Recording.2024-05-09.at.7.18.48.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2024-05-09.at.7.16.16.PM.mov

[SanthoshiBoyina]

I fell into a bit of a circular issue with login to API ML where login was successful and token written correctly then the connection no longer active message showed, when clicking the button I re-login again and it wrote the tokenType & tokenValue to the zosmf profile. very strange behavior

Can you check by adding port number 7554 to the base profile?

[JillieBeanSim]

I fell into a bit of a circular issue with login to API ML where login was successful and token written correctly then the connection no longer active message showed, when clicking the button I re-login again and it wrote the tokenType & tokenValue to the zosmf profile. very strange behavior

Can you check by adding port number 7554 to the base profile?

Hey @SanthoshiBoyina, we should be able to handle either instance of port location for the action.

[zFernand0]

It's possible that reviewers might run into this issue: (re: multiple layers)

• Profile validation assumes token auth for profile using basic auth #2682

[traeok]

Looks good so far, thanks @SanthoshiBoyina! I left a couple comments about the "config set" logic and phrasing for the entry in the quick pick.

Changes were recently addressed

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
2 Security Hotspots
13.9% Duplication on New Code (required ≤ 3%)

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[t1m0thyj]

Looks pretty good, thanks @SanthoshiBoyina!

If I have a profile with basic auth, and select the option to Change Authentication Method, then I am presented with a quick pick to choose between user/password or token 👍

If I press Escape to cancel out of this quickpick, then I would expect that my profiles should not be changed. However, the basic auth has already been removed from my profile as indicated by the notification below:

Could we wait to remove the basic auth from configuration until the point where the user has accepted all input prompts?