#DrupalSouth 2019

⚑️ Live updates comments, jobs, and issues, tagged with #DrupalSouth 2019 will update issues and activities on this page.

Issues

The last 100 updated issues.

Activities

The last 7 days of comments and CI jobs.

  • πŸ‡¨πŸ‡­Switzerland berdir Switzerland

    > That route has the _csrf_token requirement. That gets removed by the array_diff in AccessManager::check because there is no request, which the csrf_token requirement needs.

    We tried the patch and did just run into this as well.

    On one hand, I think that can be improved in masquerade and is arguably even a bug. The controller still checks access, so it's not a security issue.. masquerade_target_user_access() or masquerade_switch_user_validate() really should be exposed as an access check and the route should not _only_ have the csrf access check.

    But I'm also not sure that the approach here is correct. It's kind a neat to fall back to the url access, but probably also has some performance overhead, because it involves creating route matches and lookups and directly doing access checks on the entity really should be faster. And it's an implicit API change anyway because all implementations need to now always return their URL.

    An alternative, more "direct" approach would be to pass around a cacheability object to getDefaultOperations (tricky to add with BC) and the hook (easy to add an extra argument) and require that implementations add their access cacheability to do that and let calls deal with that. Similar to how hook_tokens() works for example.

Production build 0.71.5 2024