Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-40228

Security config hides certain parts with 2.32

    Details

    • Similar Issues:

      Description

      What incorrect behavior happened?

      If you disable global security and later try to enable it again or change the conf the security conf is not properly shown

      EDIT: To further clarify this issue does not report anything broken but some (IMHO) usability issues with the current UI

      • First, to be able to change or see the JNLP port I need to check the Enable security make the change, click save with the check enabled... to end in a UI that is not showing me my recent changes applied, i believe there is no point in hiding the JNLP port settings when security is not active
      • Second, if I have a state based control like a checkbox that says Enable security I expect checking it to have some impact on security settings. Unchecking it disables security, then why checking it does not enable anything? As you say there is a proper technical explanation, but from the end user perspective that control is misleading. When you have a checkbox that says Enable something you expect it to actually enable something, but in this case that is not true. What I am trying to say is that if this check is not enough to enable security the label should not be Enable Security . IMHO what this check really does when checked is to show the Security settings UI, so the label should reflect that. If you guys do not agree with this what about at least showing some kind of message when saving without selecting a security realm informing the user that security can not be enabled with the selected configuration??

      Environment

      • O.S.: Ubuntu 14.04.5 LTS
      • Jenkins Version: 2.32
      • Web browser: N/A
      • JDK version: JDK8

      What was the expected outcome?

      To be able to modify and configure security settings, with new data being shown

      What is the TestRail case or automated test filename where this bug was found?

      N/A

      Step by step to reproduce it

      1. Start 2.32 war in a clean home folder
      2. Disable Global security and save
      3. Try to enable it again. Set for example a fixed JNLP port on 50000, save without changing the security realm.
      4. Open security configuration again, it seems that security is not enabled (due to not using a security realm I believe) and the JNLP port is hidden

      Extra comments

      This is probably more a usability issue than a proper bug, so I created this issue only to inform and (if the team decides so) start a discussion

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            rarabaolaza Raul Arabaolaza added a comment -

            Jesse Glick Yep, the fix for JENKINS-4478 solves this, closing as duplicate

            Show
            rarabaolaza Raul Arabaolaza added a comment - Jesse Glick Yep, the fix for JENKINS-4478 solves this, closing as duplicate
            Hide
            jglick Jesse Glick added a comment -

            I believe the fix for JENKINS-4478 addresses this?

            Show
            jglick Jesse Glick added a comment - I believe the fix for JENKINS-4478 addresses this?
            Hide
            rarabaolaza Raul Arabaolaza added a comment -

            Daniel Beck

            First of all thanks for your time.

            I am afraid I have explained myself poorly, the main point of this ticket is not reporting something that is not properly working but about two possible usability issues with the UI

            • First, to be able to change or see the JNLP port I need to check the Enable security make the change, click save with the check enabled... to end in a UI that is not showing me my recent changes applied, i believe there is no point in hiding the JNLP port settings when security is not active
            • Second, if I have a state based control like a checkbox that says Enable security I expect checking it to have some impact on security settings. Unchecking it disables security, then why checking it does not enable anything? As you say there is a proper technical explanation, but from the end user perspective that control is misleading. When you have a checkbox that says Enable something you expect it to actually enable something, but in this case that is not true. What I am trying to say is that if this check is not enough to enable security the label should not be Enable Security . IMHO what this check really does when checked is to show the Security settings UI, so the label should reflect that. If you guys do not agree with this what about at least showing some kind of message when saving without selecting a security realm informing the user that security can not be enabled with the selected configuration??
            Show
            rarabaolaza Raul Arabaolaza added a comment - Daniel Beck First of all thanks for your time. I am afraid I have explained myself poorly, the main point of this ticket is not reporting something that is not properly working but about two possible usability issues with the UI First, to be able to change or see the JNLP port I need to check the Enable security make the change, click save with the check enabled... to end in a UI that is not showing me my recent changes applied, i believe there is no point in hiding the JNLP port settings when security is not active Second, if I have a state based control like a checkbox that says Enable security I expect checking it to have some impact on security settings. Unchecking it disables security, then why checking it does not enable anything? As you say there is a proper technical explanation, but from the end user perspective that control is misleading . When you have a checkbox that says Enable something you expect it to actually enable something, but in this case that is not true. What I am trying to say is that if this check is not enough to enable security the label should not be Enable Security . IMHO what this check really does when checked is to show the Security settings UI, so the label should reflect that. If you guys do not agree with this what about at least showing some kind of message when saving without selecting a security realm informing the user that security can not be enabled with the selected configuration??
            Hide
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment -

            Security cannot be enabled without selecting a security realm and authorization strategy. Check 'Jenkins user database' and 'anyone can do anything' and it should just work.

            Also, I recommend you actually set up security properly.

            Show
            danielbeck Daniel Beck added a comment - Security cannot be enabled without selecting a security realm and authorization strategy. Check 'Jenkins user database' and 'anyone can do anything' and it should just work. Also, I recommend you actually set up security properly.

              People

              • Assignee:
                Unassigned
                Reporter:
                rarabaolaza Raul Arabaolaza
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                4 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved: