Skip to content

Fix webcmdlets so that an empty Get does not include a content-length header #16587

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
adityapatwardhan merged 9 commits into from
Jan 3, 2022
Merged

Fix webcmdlets so that an empty Get does not include a content-length header #16587

adityapatwardhan merged 9 commits into from
Jan 3, 2022

Conversation

@SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member

@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT commented Dec 9, 2021 •
edited
Loading

PR Summary

This change #10034 sets an empty string for the content which results in a content-length header with value 0. This was to fix a case where a web service doesn't accept explicit empty content for a put call. However, this broke a case with a get call where normally you don't send content and the server side is failing the request when we specify a content-length header with value 0.

So the change here is to only add the content-length header for empty content if it's not a get method call.

I was running the tests locally and the numerous progress bars being rendered created a different problem (hitting a debug assert), so to avoid that I suppressed all progress in the tests as it's not really used for the tests. Existing get test was modified to check that this header isn't being added.

Also had to update dotnet links so that static analysis passes as their old links no longer work.

PR Context

If you use:

invoke-restmethod https://api.npmjs.org/downloads/range/last-month/@microsoft/mgt

This fails with the server reporting a 500 (internal server error), but works with Windows PowerShell 5.1.

Fix #15186

PR Checklist

@ghost ghost assigned adityapatwardhan Dec 9, 2021
@ghost ghost added the Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept label Dec 9, 2021
@ghost ghost removed the Waiting on Author The PR was reviewed and requires changes or comments from the author before being accept label Dec 9, 2021
PaulHigin
PaulHigin approved these changes Dec 9, 2021
View reviewed changes
PaulHigin
PaulHigin approved these changes Dec 9, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@PaulHigin PaulHigin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, I think this makes sense. There is no content but Get request expects content (and we know this because ContentType is non null) then we return empty content, and that is Ok with most servers. It feels like there is no breaking change here since we were returning empty content before anyway.

@SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member Author

SteveL-MSFT commented Dec 10, 2021

Will pickup cgmanifest and static analysis failures from doc hyperlinks once those PRs are merged to master rather than having those fixes as part of this PR

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Dec 15, 2021

@SteveL-MSFT We get another fix for #15186 in the PR #16563. It seems it cover more scenarios but doesn't have tests. How we will resolve the situation?

@iSazonov iSazonov mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2021
Closed
22 tasks
@SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member Author

SteveL-MSFT commented Dec 17, 2021

@iSazonov unfortunately I didn't see that issue and the PR. I think I'll combine that PR into this one to cover other Get cases.

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated bot commented Dec 17, 2021

This PR has 28 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

Quantification details 

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +27 -1
Percentile : 11.2%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +3 -1
.ps1 : +24 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 25, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 25, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan merged commit 7a2b445 into PowerShell:master Jan 3, 2022
@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jan 3, 2022
@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan added the CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log label Jan 3, 2022
@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT deleted the web-empty-get branch January 4, 2022 16:29
TrapGodBrim pushed a commit to TrapGodBrim/PowerShell that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2022
@SteveL-MSFT @TrapGodBrim
Fix web cmdlets so that an empty Get does not include a `content-le…
7c7466b 
…ngth` header (PowerShell#16587)
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 24, 2022

🎉v7.3.0-preview.2 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

@ghost ghost mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2022
Closed
@TravisEz13
Copy link
Member

TravisEz13 commented Mar 2, 2022

@PowerShell/powershell-maintainers
We only take security fixes and regression to LTS. This is appropriate for 7.3. This is not a regression from PowerShell 6.0 and newer. There is some concern about stability. Rejecting back-port for now.

Let's give this some bake time in 7.3 and reconsider.

@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 added the Review - Committee The PR/Issue needs a review from the PowerShell Committee label Mar 29, 2022
@TravisEz13
Copy link
Member

TravisEz13 commented Mar 29, 2022

@PowerShell/powershell-committee This issue was introduced 2 LTS (during 7.0 preview) ago and doesn't meeting the servicing criteria that the maintainers understand they have the authority to approve. Please clarify if this meets the backport criteria.

@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT added Committee-Reviewed PS-Committee has reviewed this and made a decision and removed Review - Committee The PR/Issue needs a review from the PowerShell Committee labels Apr 27, 2022
@SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member Author

SteveL-MSFT commented Apr 27, 2022

@PowerShell/powershell-committee reviewed this. Given this is a regression from 5.1 and PSCore6.x as well as real world impact based on the IETF RFC that we SHOULD not be sending content-length for empty payload, we recommend taking this to 7.2

@TravisEz13
Copy link
Member

TravisEz13 commented May 4, 2022

/backport to release/v7.2.4

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 4, 2022 •
edited by unfurl-links bot
Loading

Started backporting to release/v7.2.4: https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/actions/runs/2271259009

GitHub
PowerShell for every system! Contribute to PowerShell/PowerShell development by creating an account on GitHub.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented May 4, 2022

@TravisEz13 backporting to release/v7.2.4 failed, the patch most likely resulted in conflicts:

$ git am --3way --ignore-whitespace --keep-non-patch changes.patch

Applying: Fix webcmdlets so that an empty `Get` does not include a zero content-length
Applying: Fix handling of empty content
Applying: update cgmanifest
Using index info to reconstruct a base tree...
A	cgmanifest.json
Falling back to patching base and 3-way merge...
Auto-merging tools/cgmanifest.json
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in tools/cgmanifest.json
error: Failed to merge in the changes.
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch=diff' to see the failed patch
Patch failed at 0003 update cgmanifest
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".
Error: The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

Please backport manually!

adityapatwardhan pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 9, 2022
@SteveL-MSFT @adityapatwardhan
Fix web cmdlets so that an empty Get does not include a `content-le…
1023013 
…ngth` header (#16587)
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 17, 2022

🎉v7.2.4 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 mentioned this pull request May 24, 2022
Merged
@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 mentioned this pull request Jun 7, 2022
Merged
22 tasks
@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2024
Closed
@TravisEz13 TravisEz13 mentioned this pull request Jul 9, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan approved these changes

@iSazonov iSazonov iSazonov approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@PaulHigin PaulHigin PaulHigin approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@adityapatwardhan adityapatwardhan

Labels

Backport-7.2.x-Done CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Committee-Reviewed PS-Committee has reviewed this and made a decision Extra Small

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Invoke-WebRequest/Invoke-RestMethod: PR #10034 violates RFC7230 and therefore breaks HTTP Desync Mitigation modes

6 participants

@SteveL-MSFT @iSazonov @TravisEz13 @adityapatwardhan @PaulHigin @daxian-dbw