Closed tim-brand closed 2 years ago
Hi @tim-brand - thanks for the PR!
Two things I'm contemplating before merging this: (1) Since "community" and "user" are PDU items, and are already modelled as fields under message.pdu, it seems that having these appear at that same place i.e. "pdu.user" or "pdu.community" is more consistent with the handling of these elsewhere. (2) I don't think logging auth and priv keys is necessary or desirable here, so I'm thinking it might be best to remove these from the user sub-object (logging all other user fields is fine).
How do those sound to you?
Hi @markabrahams, thanks for the good notes. I totally agree and will perform the changes.
@markabrahams Could you check this again? Thanks!
Hi @tim-brand - thanks for that!
I've merged the PR with a couple of changes: (1) Changed the value of the "user" key from the whole "user" object to just the name i.e. "user.name" (2) Changed the name of the option from "showAuthInCallback" to "includeAuthentication"
This is published in version 3.6.2 of the npm.
Sorry, I totally forgot to only use the name of the user object. It was my intention to do so. Thanks for the change and npm publish!
In our solution we're using the
community
value to route the message to it's destination. It might be helpful for others too, so I added this as an option to the receiver options. The options is disabled by default, so that the information does not gets included somewhere by accident.