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

ConfigMap name missing UI validation #9442

Closed
nickwsuse opened this issue Jul 27, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

ConfigMap name missing UI validation #9442

nickwsuse opened this issue Jul 27, 2023 · 2 comments

Comments

@nickwsuse
Copy link

Setup

  • Rancher version: v2.7.5
  • Rancher UI Extensions:
  • Browser type & version: Chrome Version 115.0.5790.98 (Official Build) (arm64)

Describe the bug
When attempting to create a configmap that has a capital letter in the name, the request is made with no error checks and you get an api error page instead of an error on the UI (or the string being lowercased before the request is made).

To Reproduce

  1. Provision a v2.7.5 Rancher instance
  2. Log into the Rancher instance
  3. Click into the local cluster from the home page
  4. On the left side of the page, click Storage -> ConfigMaps
  5. Click the Create button in the upper right of the page
  6. In the Name field, enter at least one uppercase character and whatever else you want
  7. Click the Create button on the lower right of the page

Result
Receive an API error

Expected Result
Receive a UI error (or the text is lowercased for the request)

Screenshots
image

@richard-cox
Copy link
Member

Reproduced in 2.7.5, but in master (2.7q3) we get taken back to the config maps list. The request still fails. There's no error presented to user.

Tries the same with secrets, but the error is shown to the user.

Given the limited impact, i don't think this is a blocker, moving out of 2.7q3

@richard-cox richard-cox removed this from the v2.7.next3 milestone Aug 10, 2023
@richard-cox
Copy link
Member

richard-cox commented May 15, 2024

#10794 was a duplicate of this however has been processed / resolved first, so closing this one

Edit: It's not quite the same, however will present the issue to the user correctly

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants