Skip to content

[Update] Added Forbidden Response Check in PagerDuty Detector Verification #4521

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

Open
nabeelalam wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+16 −1
Open

[Update] Added Forbidden Response Check in PagerDuty Detector Verification #4521

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
4477700
added forbidden status check in pagerdutyapikey detector verification
nabeelalam Oct 29, 2025
4b4a9f5
Merge branch 'main' into update/detector/pagerdutyapikey-detector-update
amanfcp Nov 24, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions pkg/detectors/pagerdutyapikey/pagerdutyapikey.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ package pagerdutyapikey
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"io"
"net/http"
"strings"

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -84,6 +85,20 @@ func verifyPagerdutyapikey(ctx context.Context, client *http.Client, token strin
switch res.StatusCode {
case http.StatusOK:
return true, nil
case http.StatusForbidden:
bodyBytes, err := io.ReadAll(res.Body)
if err != nil {
return false, err
}
bodyStr := string(bodyBytes)

// 403 with "Access Denied" and "2010" means valid credentials with insufficient permissions.
// Ref: https://developer.pagerduty.com/docs/errors
if strings.Contains(bodyStr, "Access Denied") && strings.Contains(bodyStr, "2010") {
Copy link
Contributor

@martinlocklear martinlocklear Dec 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wish there was unit test coverage for this. Also, does it make sense to actually parse the JSON, rather than to just do a string contains?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@nabeelalam nabeelalam Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the review @martinlocklear, an additional unit test would be beneficial, yes.

Generally in detectors I've seen us rely on string contains, unless we need to extract something from the response. If our matching string is specific enough -- which I feel it is, in our case -- I lean towards string contains. IMO this would would also be slightly more adaptive to any potential change in the response shape (e.g. if keys get renamed but the message still contains these keywords)

return true, nil
}

return false, fmt.Errorf("response status forbidden 403: %s", bodyStr)
case http.StatusUnauthorized:
return false, nil
default:
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion pkg/detectors/pagerdutyapikey/pagerdutyapikey_integration_test.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@ func TestPagerDutyApiKey_FromChunk(t *testing.T) {
t.Errorf("PagerDutyApiKey.FromData() verificationError = %v, wantVerificationErr %v", got[i].VerificationError(), tt.wantVerificationErr)
}
}
ignoreOpts := cmpopts.IgnoreFields(detectors.Result{}, "Raw", "verificationError")
ignoreOpts := cmpopts.IgnoreFields(detectors.Result{}, "Raw", "verificationError", "primarySecret")
if diff := cmp.Diff(got, tt.want, ignoreOpts); diff != "" {
t.Errorf("PagerDutyApiKey.FromData() %s diff: (-got +want)\n%s", tt.name, diff)
}
Expand Down
Loading