Open oliverjohns opened 9 months ago
Hello, @oliverjohns and thank you for opening this issue. I've marked this as a feature request that has a version parity difference from v5 to v6 and will review this with our team. We'll follow up with any further comments or questions we have.
Hi @oliverjohns can I please ask you to help me learn more about your flow at a high level? I am trying to understand where best to expose this username and also to clarify your need for it during sign in - would this be the same username as the one passed into the signIn
API call?
Hi @oliverjohns can I please ask you to help me learn more about your flow at a high level? I am trying to understand where best to expose this username and also to clarify your need for it during sign in - would this be the same username as the one passed into the
signIn
API call?
Yes correct.
We used it in order to fetch some user settings to be used in the MFA setup step.
However, we decided to replace cognito with passport since cognito is such a horrible service.
@oliverjohns, we appreciate any and all feedback. I'll review this with our team internally again as we assess how to make the upgrade/migration experience from v5 to v6 more seamless.
Is this related to a new or existing framework?
No response
Is this related to a new or existing API?
Authentication
Is this related to another service?
Cognito
Describe the feature you'd like to request
I want the user's username to be available in the v6 library in the setup TOTP step (after logging in, but before finishing the setup TOTP challenge). In v6, all relevant library functions result in a "you must be authenticated" error.
In v5 it works just fine by fetching the current user even though TOTP setup is not finished.
Describe the solution you'd like
Return the user's username in the totpSetupDetails object or expose it via some library function.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Right now I am doing this
const username = user.nextStep.totpSetupDetails.getSetupUri('test').pathname.split('test:')[1];
Which is an absolutely ridiculous way of getting this piece of information that obviously is available at this setup step.
Additional context
No response
Is this something that you'd be interested in working on?