I've started to look into the azure sdk for node.js (link below) and interestingly enough I've hit a wall in what I'd image would be one of the most common tasks one would want to achieve using Azure's REST endpoints which is checking the status of a virtual machine.
I can easily get a list of all machine, or one in particular but the response from this services don't include the current status of the VM (running,stopped etc.)
There's absolutely no info out there regarding this particular scenario in the docos or the web other than a blog post (https://github.com/Azure/azure-xplat-cli/issues/2565) which is actually in regards of a different library.
Please not that I'm using the azure-arm-compute library which is part of the Node.js azure sdk.
Any help would be very much appreciated
github repo: https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-node
To get Virtual Machine statuses, please use function get(resourceGroupName, vmName, optionsopt, optionalCallbackopt), and pass the vaule {expand: 'instanceView'} as the options parameter.
var msRestAzure = require('ms-rest-azure');
var computeManagementClient = require('azure-arm-compute');
// Interactive Login
// It provides a url and code that needs to be copied and pasted in a browser and authenticated over there. If successful,
// the user will get a DeviceTokenCredentials object.
msRestAzure.interactiveLogin(function(err, credentials) {
var client = new computeManagementClient(credentials, 'ed0caab7***');
client.virtualMachines.get('<resourceGroupName>', '<vmName>', {expand: 'instanceView'}, function(err, result, request, response) {
if (err) console.log(err);
console.log(result.instanceView);
});
});
Related
I am currently working on a project, one of the elements of which is Amazon Connect. So far I have the function of triggering the connection locally on the disk and according to the documentation I am using the following code.
const AWS = require('aws-sdk');
AWS.config.loadFromPath('./configuration/keys/key-aws.json');
exports.makeCall = (number) => {
let connect = new AWS.Connect();
var params = {
InstanceId: 'xxxxxx',
ContactFlowId: 'xxxxxx',
SourcePhoneNumber: 'xxxxxx',
DestinationPhoneNumber: number,
Attributes: {},
};
connect.startOutboundVoiceContact(
params,
function(error, response) {
if (error) {
console.log(error)
callback('Error', null);
} else {
console.log('Initiated an outbound call with Contact Id ' + JSON.stringify(response.ContactId));
}
}
);
};
My questions about this:
Is it possible to track the call status (in progress / completed / rejected), because in the above solution we only get information that the connection has been initiated, and we only have ContactId in the response.
Is it possible to use a custom function in Amazon connect without using AWS Lamda, but an external source (eg App engine from GCP).
Is it possible to create a solution where I can make another call only after finishing the first one?
Thanks in advance for your help!
There are a couple of options here. You could call DecribeContact and check the DisconnectTimestamp and the ConnectedToAgentTimestamp this can tell you if the call is still in progress and if it got to an agent, therfore if it got answered. However you'd have to keep calling this function to track the call.
The other option involves using the kinesis data stream and monitoring that to track the contact and calling the lamba when the contact completes. See https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/with-kinesis.html
I would be writing the contactid to a dynamodb and using that in the lambda that watches the kinesis stream.
Do you mean from within a contact flow? If so then not directly, you can only call lambdas, but the lambda could call the external source.
Sure, either using the DecribeContact call as above Or, if you send the outbound call to a queue that only has a single agent associated with it (via a Routing Profile or using an Agent Queue) the you could use GetCurrentMetricData and check the AGENTS_AVAILABLE and CONTACTS_IN_QUEUE metrics to decide whether to create a new call.
why don't you use amazon streams API? you will get the call statuses in every single event. e.g. OnConnecting, OnConnected, OnMissed & OnCompleted.
We are using nodejs as my backend application and react native in front end. And azure application insights for logging. In UI side, we are redirecting to Stripe checkout page(external page) for payment and then coming back to our application's confirmation page. Here we are loosing the flow on end-to-end transaction. My requirement is to link pre-stripe and post-stripe operation into one single flow. For this my approach of solving this problem is accessing OPERATIONID and pass it to stripe and receive it back from Stripe and use it in confirmation page so that we will one single flow. I Need help in guiding me to the right documentation/ solution proposals.
I read some articles(eg: How to get Application Insights operation id in javascript?) and figured out that operationId is a uniqueID which gets created out of my application and cant access it in the application. I tried to use below code and got response of that operationID as "ai.operation.id" but seems like this is not the right pattern(value) of operationId.
import { defaultClient } from 'applicationinsights';
const telemetryClient = defaultClient;
// tslint:disable-next-line:no-console
console.log(telemetryClient.context.keys[`operationId`]);
The main function of operationId is to help tracking distributed systems so you can correlate requests. So as given in this documentation in nodejs client, you should set the setDistributedTracingMode to appInsights.DistributedTracingModes.AI_AND_W3C as shown below.
const appInsights = require("applicationinsights");
appInsights
.setup("<your ikey>")
.setDistributedTracingMode(appInsights.DistributedTracingModes.AI_AND_W3C)
.start()
You should be able to get the operation id using the following code snippet.
const AppInsights = require("applicationinsights");
var context = AppInsights.getCorrelationContext();
var oid = context.operation.id;
If it does not solve your problem then, I would suggest you to set telemetry.context.operation.id to be a unique id by yourself and confirm if this is tracked by the Application Insights properly.
Also note that the latest version of the JavaScript SDK (SDK v2) for Application Insights have some changes as given in this document.
Moved context.operation to context.telemetryTrace. Some fields were also changed (operation.id --> telemetryTrace.traceID).
To keep the trace ID unique, where you previously used Util.newId(), now use Util.generateW3CId(). Both ultimately end up being the operation ID.
For more information read this log custom telemetry document.
I have a web application and I want to track its crashing reports.
Can I use Firebase crashlytics or Fabric for this purpose. In their site its mentioned its only for Android or ios.
Regards,
Makrand
There is feature request: https://github.com/firebase/firebase-js-sdk/issues/710
Looks like it's not supported at all, fabric didn't supported crashlytics on web either so it looks like there are maybe some alternatives like https://www.bugsnag.com but I would like to have it too in one place. Don't see difference between web, android or iOS clients at all, don't know why this is not supported.
But for some possible solution for Vue framework is to catch errors and send it to google analytics where you can connect also your firebase mobile apps. I think to try it this way for now. I didnt tested it yet so don't know if I have to catch window errors too.
Vue.config.errorHandler = function (error) {
//Toast.error(error.message)
console.warn(error.message)
//send error as event to google analytcs...
if (error) message = error.stack;
ga('send', 'event', 'Vue.config.errorHandler', message, navigator.userAgent);
}
window.onerror = function(message, source, lineno, colno, error) {
// maybe we need to also catch errors here and send to GA
}
But I found something like this too for typescript https://github.com/enkot/catch-decorator
While there is still no firebase crashlytics for web, google offers Stackdriver with error reporting functionality - it keeps track of all errors with ability to mark them as resolved (it can also send email notifications about new errors):
You can access it using the below url (make sure to put your firebase {project_id} in the link before clicking it):
https://console.cloud.google.com/errors?project={project_id}
There are two ways on how to use it:
Easy way, limited flexibility.
Every console.error(new Error(...)) reported from your firebase function is automatically tracked in the Stackdriver error logging platform.
So you just need to send an error report from your web app to your firebase function and log it using console.error inside that function.
Note, only an instances of Error object will be sent to the Stackdriver platform. For example console.error("{field1: 'text'}") won't be sent to Stackdriver. More info on that in this doc
More comprehensive way that provides an additional control (you can also report userId, your custom platform name, it's version, user agent, etc):
Here is a quick snippet on how it can be used (in our case we first send the error log from web app to our server and then report the error to Stackdriver):
in firebase nodejs:
const {ErrorReporting} = require('#google-cloud/error-reporting');
let serviceAccount = {...} //service account is your firebase credetials that holds your secret keys etc. See below for more details.
let config = {
projectId: serviceAccount.project_id,
reportMode: "always",
credentials: serviceAccount
}
let errors = new ErrorReporting(config);
Report error to Stackdriver from nodejs:
async function reportError(message){
//message is a string that contains the error name with an optional
//stacktrace as a string representing each stack frame separated using "\n".
//For example:
//message = "Error: Oh-hoh\n at MyClass.myMethod (filename.js:12:23)\n etc.etc."
const errorEvent = this.errors.event()
.setMessage(message)
.setUser(userId)
.setServiceContext("web-app", "1.0.0")
await errors.report(errorEvent)
}
More info about the Stackdriver library is available in this doc. And more info about the stacktrace and it's format can be found in the docs here
A few notes on setting it up:
You need to enable two things:
Enable Stackdrive api for your project using the link below (make sure to set your firebase {project_id} in the url below before clicking it)
https://console.developers.google.com/apis/library/clouderrorreporting.googleapis.com?project={project_id}
Make sure to also grant "Error writer" permission to the firebase service account so Stackdriver can receive the error logs (service account is a sort of representation of a "user" for your firebase project who accesses the services)
To grant the premission, follow the below steps:
first locate the "Firebase service account" using your firebase dashboard link (you can find it below) and remember it's value - it looks something like firebase-adminsdk-{random_symbols}#{project_id}.iam.gserviceaccount.com
Then open gcloud console under "Access"->"IAM". Or use the following link:
https://console.cloud.google.com/access/iam?project={project_id} <- put your firebase project id here
Locate your Firebase service account from the step 1.
Press edit for that account and add "Errors writer" permission:
Where to find the serviceAccount.json:
Regarding the serviceAccount - this is a universal credentials that can be used to authenticate many google services including the Stackdriver. You can obtain yours from your firebase dashboard using the url below (just put your firebase project_id in the link before using it):
https://console.firebase.google.com/u/0/project/{project_id}/settings/serviceaccounts/adminsdk
Open it and click "generate new credentials". This will generate a new service account and download the serviceAccount.json that you need to keep safe (you won't be able to get it again unless you generate a new one).
Apparently Sentry now supports several web frameworks out of the box.
I have recently integrated Sentry crashlytics for Django App.
see here:
https://sentry.io/platforms/
I've added Azure Active Directory Authentication to my function app, but as soon as I set "Action to take when request is not authenticated" to "Login with Azure Active Directory", the development interface for the function app yields this message:
Error:
We are unable to reach your function app. Your app could be having a temporary issue or may be failing to start. You can check logs or try again in a couple of minutes.
Session Id: 23a5880ec94743f5a9d3ac705515b294
Timestamp: 2016-11-16T08:36:54.242Z
Presumably adding the authentication requirement breaks access to the function app in some fashion... though I am able to make changes in the code editor, and they do take effect, I no longer see updates in the log panel: no compilation output messages, for example.
Does anyone know a work-around for this?
So far, I've tried just leaving the auth option to "Allow anonymous requests (no action)" and using this following code:
public static async Task<HttpResponseMessage> Run(HttpRequestMessage req, TraceWriter log)
{
log.Info("C# HTTP trigger function processed a request.");
var user = "Anonymous";
var claimsPrincipal = Thread.CurrentPrincipal as ClaimsPrincipal;
if (claimsPrincipal != null && claimsPrincipal.Identity.IsAuthenticated)
{
user = claimsPrincipal.Identity.Name;
log.Info($"Hello {user}");
}
return req.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, "Hello " + user);
}
However, this (rightly) doesn't redirect to the authentication provider... I would prefer to have the app take care of all that gunge for me, but if doing so means I can't see compilation messages / log messages, it makes it pretty hard to see what's going on.
Nathan,
Unfortunately, this is a limitation at the moment and we're tracking it here: https://github.com/projectkudu/AzureFunctionsPortal/issues/794
Your approach, to allow anonymous and validate in the function is what we recommend at the moment. To extend your workaround, you can add the following code to initiate a login redirect when you detect an anonymous user (the code below assumes you are using AAD).
else
{
log.Info("Received an anonymous request! Redirecting...");
var res = req.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Redirect);
res.Headers.Location = new Uri(req.RequestUri, $"/.auth/login/aad?post_login_redirect_uri={req.RequestUri.AbsolutePath}&token_mode=session");
return res;
}
We understand that isn't ideal and appreciate your patience while we work to improve this.
Thanks!
I have been reading the documentation at https://docs.truevault.com/ but I am a little confused. I read this on the true vault site:
If you plan on using any of the server-side libraries, please ensure
any hosting environment you use is HIPAA compliant.
I took this to mean that TrueValut could support a standalone (client side only) mobile application architecture. Where the TrueVault API was the only server side interaction.
However my understanding of the documentation is that:
An API_KEY is required to register a new user.
Any API_KEY provides full access to all data vaults and JSON documents stored in TrueVault.
If both of these assumptions are correct that would mean it would be impossible to register new users directly from the client side app, forcing me to use a costly and resource intensive HIPPA compliment web server. The only way to get around this would be top hard code the API_KEY into the app, an obvious no go if that API_KEY can access all of my TrueVault data.
For my use case I have the following requirements for TrueVault for me to be able to consider using it (I would imagine these requirements are the same for anyone looking to develop a client side only healthcare application):
A user can sign up via the API directly from my client side app without requiring any sensitive keys or root auth data.
A user can authenticate using only the data they provided to sign up (username/email/password). My app is multi platform I cant ask them to remember their API keys to log in.
A user can Read/Write/Update/Delete data linked to their profile. They can not access any data from another user using their credentials.
Is TrueVault able to deliver these three basic requirements?
If the answer to this is "No" I would recommend you update this text on your website as there are not going to me any viable HIPPA compliment applications that can be supported by TrueVault without an independent server side interface.
I'm currently using AWS Lambda as a solution. Lambda is HIPPA compliant, more info here. Lambda is also a low cost solution.
Here is an example of the code I'm running on Lambda using Node.js.
var request = require('request-promise');
var _ = require('lodash');
function encodeBase64(str) {
return (new Buffer(str)).toString('base64');
}
var baseUrl = 'https://api.truevault.com/v1/';
var headers = {
'Content-Type': 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded;charset=utf-8'
};
var req = request.defaults({
baseUrl: baseUrl,
headers: _.extend({
Authorization: 'Basic ' + encodeBase64('your api key:')
}, headers),
transform: function(body) {
return JSON.parse(body);
}
});
exports.handler = function(event, context) {
req.post('users', {
form: {
username: event.email,
password: event.password,
attributes: encodeBase64(JSON.stringify({
name: event.name
}))
}
}).then(function() {
context.succeed({user: user});
}).catch(context.fail);
}
In general, you are correct - if you include zero server-side processing between user and TrueVault, then the API keys will be public. At least, I don't know of any way to avoid this.
That being said, it is incorrect to jump to "any API_KEY provides full access to all data vaults and JSON documents stored in TrueVault." - that's not the case if setup properly.
TrueVault API keys are able to be narrowed in scope quite a lot. Limiting a key to only Write permission on {Vault#1}, a second key to only Read permission on {Vault#2}, a third key to allow uploading Blogs in {Vault#1}, quite a few variations, a forth for deleting information from {Vault#2}, and on as needed. You can also limit permissions specifically to content "owned" by the API key (e.g. user-specific keys) Full documentation here.
There are also limited scope keys (set expiry time, usage count, limit to any of the prior permission scopes). Docs here.
TrueVault also offers user logins separate from API keys which may be better suited if your user are using login credentials. Docs here.
I'm still rather figuring out TrueVault myself (at time of writing at least) so be sure to research and review more for your needs. I'm still torn if the limited scoping is "good enough" for my needs - I'm leaning towards using AWS Lambda (or similar) to be a HIPAA compliant middle man, if only to better hide my access token generation and hide that my data is going to TrueVault and add some "serverless-server-side" data validation of sorts.