How to configure accounting filter?
For example, there are two types of users:
jack#gmail.com
anna#yahoo.com
123qwer-user
It is necessary that only the user jack#google.com and anna#yahoo.com. I have tried to write regex to the accounting section, but it didn’t work.
You can use string filter with "=~" in if condition of the authorize section. Note that you can only apply this to only string so use attribute value in string like %{User-Name}
you can use simple regular expression like "[\w-]+#([\w-]+.)+[\w-]+" for comparison
I do not have an instance running currently to try, Will spin one soon and try and update the actual condition.
Hope this helps.
Related
Suppose I want to create 3 custom release variables on TFS.
variable1
variable2
variable3
can i specify somewhere that to enter a variable3, user must enter variable1 and 2?
i cant prepopulate them myself because the input is quiet dynamic.
for now i am using an ugly method like this:
variable2_MUST_ENTER_VARIABLE1_FIRST
variable3_MUST_ENTER_VARIABLE1_AND_VARIABLE2_FIRST
i wish there is a way to specify some sort of note next to the textbox or something :/
Is it possible to have a condition for a custom variable?
The short answer is yes. But I could not quite confirm if it is what you want.
To set a condition for a custom variable, we could enable a custom condition on the task in the pipeline:
Conditions:
Conditions are written as expressions. The agent evaluates the
expression beginning with the innermost function and works its way
out. The final result is a boolean value that determines if the task,
job, or stage should run or not. See the expressions topic for a full
guide to the syntax.
example:
and(succeeded(), ne(variables['variable1'], ''))
But, this condition for a custom variable will be applied at build/release time instead of entering the value of variable.
i wish there is a way to specify some sort of note next to the textbox
or something
If you want to set the condition for a custom variable on the UI, I am afraid there is no such better way than you are using at this moment. You can add your request for this feature on our UserVoice site (https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/idea/post.html?space=21 ), which is our main forum for product suggestions. Thank you for helping us build a better Azure DevOps.
Hope this helps.
I am writing my first Wireshark dissector. I am writing it in Lua, using this as an example. My communication protocol embeds a command ID in the response header, followed by well-defined payloads that differ based on the command ID. So far, I've been structuring the ProtoFields such that the Abbreviated name of the field (the string used in filters) follows a naming convention like this
proto_name.command_name.field_name
Some commands have similar fields, like in the following example
myproto.cmd_update.updateId
myproto.cmd_update_ack.updateId
where, per the protocol, an update command must be acknowledged with a update_ack command with the same updateId payload. Ideally, i would like to create a wireshark filter such that I can see all packets pertaining to the updateId field. I tried creating a filter like
myproto.*.updateId == 0x1234
but that appears to be invalid wireshark filter syntax. I don't want to make the filter explicit like
myproto.cmd_update.updateId == 0x1234 or myproto.cmd_update_ack.updateId == 0x1234
because in my actual protocol there are many more commands with similar/related fields. Is there a filter syntax I can use? Or perhaps, should I structure my dissector's ProtoField abbreviations differently?
There doesn't appear to be a wildcard syntax for the filter line, so I wound up solving this in the dissector itself. In addition to the myproto.*.updateId fields, I also added another field called myproto.updateId (note the lack of the wildcard in the middle). Its value is set to the same thing as the full blown field name, which means that I now have just one field name to search against. I also set this field as hidden = true to hide it from view.
It's a bit of a hack, but gives me what I want.
You could try using a Wireshark display filter macro.
I'm attempting to create a form step where one of the form step items is an email input. For this I want to validate the email against certain domains i.e.
#gmail.com, #icloud.com, #me.com
I can see we have an email answer format in the form of this:
ORKEmailAnswerFormat()
However I can't see anywhere in this type that allows me to apply a validation regex. Looking into this I see we have the following
ORKAnswerFormat.textAnswerFormatWithValidationRegex(validationRegex, invalidMessage)
I suppose this is my best option? If so, would anyone know of a regex (my regex isn't the greatest!) in swift that would handle the 3 domains stated above?
I have something like this...(not the greatest i know!)
[A-Z0-9a-z._%+-]+#gmail.com
[A-Z0-9a-z._%+-]+#(?:icloud|me|gmail)\.com
(or, if you don't care about capturing:)
[A-Z0-9a-z._%+-]+#(icloud|me|gmail)\.com
Now I made two modifications. I escaped the . and I made it so that the other two domains are options.
I suggest that you convert the whole thing to lower case. I don't know Swift, but you may be able to use one of its functions or the i modifier:
(?i)[0-9a-z._%+-]+#(icloud|me|gmail)\.com
In my forward method, I need to have a param that is list:
forward(params:[selectedLicences:[1,2,3]]],action...)
Currently, when the same parameters are submitted through a form, I access them like this:
List<Long> licenses = params.list("selectedLicences").collect{it as Long}
Is it possible to use the same code when forwarding, or I need to have code that will process the resulting String [1,2,3] and change it into a list?
I have seen one solution is to use the flash storage, but I am looking for other alternatives as well.
Could not find a way to do it, so I am forwarding a list, which turns to string, and then I parse it back to list on receiving controller.. I am not working with large data (usually 2-3 values) so performance is not an issue in this case..
Dealing with some legacy code we came across a rather annoying situation. We are looping through a query with the <cfoutput query="x"> tag. That query has a column named 'url'. Within that loop we need to check if a key exists within the url scope. Since CF puts a priority on what's in the query over general page scopes I can't use a structKeyExists(url,"key") since as far as CF is concerned at this point, url is a string with the value from the current row of the query.
How can I break out of the query scope and inspect what's in my url?
As a temporary we are using isDefined("url.key"), but I would still like to know if there is a way to break out of the query scope.
Also can't really change the column, or even the column name in the query without a few hours of work tracking down an changing all references to it, so we're going to avoid that if at all possible.
EDIT:
There seems to be some confusion as to how this code is set up, and why the simple solutions don't apply. It would be hard for me to give a thorough example but I will try to clarify the situation.
There are many pages that would count as 'pageA' for the following example. Enough that changing how things work would require a change in scope and investment in time that's just not going to happen in the time allotted.
PageA runs a query with one of the columns being named url, then starts an output loop via cfoutput, inside that loop PageB is included. One PageA may have different variables in the URL scope than another PageA, actually they are the same, but may be named differently(varID=x in one case vid=x in another). Inside of PageB I need to use the value from that url scope, so I want to run through the different possible names (if key 'varID' exists in url, use it, otherwise use 'vid').
This is why I want to "punch through" the query scope to get the url structure, and not the url column from the query. Any other method seems to require modifying the many PageAs.
So the question is not how to solve this problem specifically, as there are many ways to do it, I would just really like to avoid them as they all add a lot of time in implementation and testing. The question remains, is there a way to access the url scope as a variable if url exists as a query column and you are in the query scope.
I thought it might work to create a function that returned the url scope, but upon testing it, even with a local-scoped query (which prevents the function using the query itself) the use of url inside the function is still corrupted:
<cffunction name="getUrlScope"><cfreturn Url /></cffunction>
...
<cfoutput query="x">
<cfif StructKeyExists( getUrlScope() , 'key' )>
<!--- still fails :( --->
There is however an undocumented (meaning unsupported and liable to change) option. If you dump getPageContext() you will see a bunch of functions that do interesting things, including dealing with scopes.
You can use getPageContext().SymTab_findBuiltinScope('URL') to get at the URL scope.
You can also use getPageContext().getCfScopes() to get an array of scopes. I'm not sure if the order is guaranteed fixed but it seems to be [cgi,?,url,form,cookie,?] checking on both CF10 and cflive (CF9), so possibly is.
(In CF8 there was the method getBuiltinScopes, which returned a struct instead of an array - this no longer appears to exist, reinforcing the whole unsupported and changeable nature of these methods.)
On Railo those don't work, but there is getPageContext.UrlScope() and similarly-named functions for the other scopes.
One solution would be to assign the url struct to a new variable outside of the cfoutput tag and then reference that variable instead of url. Example:
<cfset urlScope = url>
<cfoutput query="x">
<cfset keyExists = structKeyExists(urlScope, "key")>
</cfoutput>
My solution for this is always to alias the url column in the query as int
SELECT URL as qURL FROM myTable ...
IF you don't have access to the query (it's a stored precedure or used elswhere etc) you can always use query of a query to reselect it with your alias.
I don't care for the idea of creating a separate reference to URL outside the output - but that would also work. I just want to KNOW what is user input (i.e. comes from the URL or FORM) and what is generated internally (i.e. comes from a query).
Couldn't you move structKeyExists(url,"key") outside of the cfoutput block, and store that into a variable? Or do a structAppend to copy the url struct into another struct named something else?
Another approach is to replace your cfoutput block with a cfloop block.
<cfloop from="1' to = "#YourQuery.recordcount#" index = "idx">
<cfif StructKeyExits(url,"key")>
<cfoutput>
#url.key# is not the same as #YourQuery.url[idx]#
which can also be referenced like this #YourQuery["url"][idx]
etc