AWI: incorrect field validation for the Email 1 field in LDAP-enabled USER objects

[Michael A. Lowry]

The AWI performs incorrect field validation for the Email 1 field in LDAP-enabled USER objects.

Specifically, the AWI enforces the requirement that LDAP-enabled USER objects have a value in the Email 1 field. In our environment have many technical users (also known as non-personal users) that are used to perform automated actions, and are not associated with physical persons. These users do not have email addresses in LDAP, and our LDAP administrators have informed us that it is not permitted to add email addresses for these users.

The Java User Interface did not enforce the requirement that LDAP-enabled USER objects have a value in the Email 1 field. We have been using the Automation Engine without email addresses in these users for almost a decade without any problems.

This bug means that we are not able to save changes to LDAP-enabled USER objects of technical (non-personal) users.

Work-around
We can work around the problem by exporting the USER object to XML, making the required changes, and re-importing it. On XML import, the Automation Engine does not enforce the requirement that LDAP-enabled USER objects have a value in the Email 1 field.

We opened a support ticket for this more than one year ago, but the problem was not fixed. Today, we opened a new support ticket for the problem.

[Carsten Schmitz]

You might be able to use any email address @example.com as a temporary workaround. That domain is an official trash can, as per the email RFC.
​

[Tim Quakulinsky]

And once again I learned something new :-)

Does your might have the same meaning as in RFC 6919? ;-)

------------------------------
Automation Evangelist
Fiducia & GAD IT AG
---
Mitglied des deutschsprachigen Automic-Anwendervereins FOKUS e.V.
Member of the German speaking Automic user association FOKUS e.V.
------------------------------

[Carsten Schmitz]

Does your might have the same meaning as in RFC 6919? ;-)

Certainly!

Since I don't know the exact circumstances of @Michael A. Lowry 's situation, I do believe might is the logical choice here. He might be forbidden from entering any email domain with seven letters in the domain-part by his superiors after all, or something like that.

In fact, I love RFC 6919, it's one of my favorite RFC (we all have top ranking lists of our favorite RFC, right? Guys?). I find it very important to define baseline terms such as these in a specialized, and also international, context.

Imagine if Broadcom would begin to clearly define terms such as "Orchestration", "AI" or also "Deployment Node". The world would suddenly be so much better! ;)

(​​​​​​and yes, I DID in passing confuse 6919 and https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt, why'd you ask? :D )

------------------------------
The totally unofficial Automic forum FAQ:

https://pastebin.com/raw/Nd7Ny6kb
------------------------------

[Michael A. Lowry]

The users in question are LDAP-enabled, so the Email 1 field is not editable in the AWI. The field is automatically populated from LDAP, and again, the LDAP administrators refuse to add dummy email addresses for these users.

The JUI did not impose this restriction. It is a change between the JUI and the AWI. This change in behavior was not documented in the release notes.

[Carsten Schmitz]

Fair points!

(Also, good thing I said might :D)

[Tim Quakulinsky]

@Carsten Schmitz: For saying goodbye to the community earlier, you are still pretty active here ;-)
​​

------------------------------
Automation Evangelist
Fiducia & GAD IT AG
---
Mitglied des deutschsprachigen Automic-Anwendervereins FOKUS e.V.
Member of the German speaking Automic user association FOKUS e.V.
------------------------------

[Carsten Schmitz]

For saying goodbye to the community earlier, you are still pretty active here ;-)

Well, I'm tying up loose ends in ongoing threads certainly.

I can hardly abandon the already active discussions and stop posting mid-sentence? Doing that would be