This is now the 4th time I am sending my app for review. I want to use Instagram Basic Display API and therefore require instagram_graph_user_media permission to access media (and incidentally instagram_graph_user_profile). I have 2 test users, my personal IG account with a bunch of pics and a test user that I created with an empty feed. I can login with both users. But when the Instagram app reviewer is logging in, my app can't access their media. I successfully retrieve the access token but when comes the time to call the Graph API here is what happens:
https://graph.instagram.com/me/media?fields=media_type,media_url,permalink,thumbnail_url&access_token=IGQV....
returns
{"error":{"message":"Application does not have permission for this action","type":"IGApiException","code":10,"fbtrace_id":"A99vuaAC41DSvlt0Hxvcly-"}}
Here is an update from my latest app review rejection. This time, I added the code above to catch code 10 errors and if I did, try to fetch the user profile data. Guess what, that failed with a code 10 error as well. So, whatever the app reviewer is doing, it is granting access to neither the profile or the media API.
Another update. The reviewer I had this time sent me two screenshots, one of the Instagram login screen and one of my app's error screen. Interestingly, the Instagram login screen had a strange Instagram username that I have never heard of before. It certainly wasn't my test Instagram account. So I now have evidence of them both using my test account and their own special test accounts.
The question in my mind now is, is there something special about their test accounts that ruins the process? After all, I have not added them to be testers of my app, although if someone who hasn't accepted my test invite tries to log in, it errors in an entirely different way.
I am running out of ideas here. My next thing to try is to exchange the short-lived access token for a long-lived token, as well as trying to use the new access token to server-side (where I exchange the code for the access token) to check if the access token ever works or if it is created with insufficient access.
This whole process is a nightmare.
I will put this as an answer because we have dealt with this thing now for over 2 weeks and quite a few submissions. I think you should remove the bounty though.
What you have done so far:
Created and approved IG test accounts
Double and triple checked parameters & permission
Tested your app a dozen times
Created dozens of screencast spoon-feeding, making sure a 5 yo kid would be able to test your app
Having the above, I am sure you noticed:
The reviewer will add a generic text as 'reject reason.'
The reviewer will submit the irrelevant and out-of-scope screenshot(s)
The reviewer will not test with the Instagram credentials provided.
Maybe he WILL test with the Instagram test credentials provided (in fact you're left in the dark as to how they actually simulate IG access)
The reviewer will claim he's unable to sign in using provided credentials
The reviewer claims having tested, but you see no traces in your DB whatsoever (would be smart to do so, to know whether they're actually doing something or not, up to a certain point)
Conclusion
You have to know that your app is at the reviewer's mercy and approval sometimes arbitrarily. Eventually, you will find your app being approved while having submitted it to change at all.
This should be obvious but when you are so deep in the hole and try to think why your app is being rejected you stop thinking logically.
Here is what I did:
Create a dummy Instagram account.
Link this account to an email provider that doesn't require a phone/another way of verification (I used ProtonMail).
Use an Instagram Tester account (do the whole process).
In your instructions let the reviewer that they need to log in to ProtonMail to get the Instagram confirmation code; since they will do login from an unknown location (if you could simulate the above in your screencast that would be great, but I didn't do it).
If you apply for both instagram_graph_user_profile and instagram_graph_user_media you need to do this in 2 steps individually.
The second step getting the instagram_graph_user_media permission is much easier.
I lost a couple of days and tried everything and anything before I realized that.
Hopefully, this should help someone that is having the same problem.
The app was approved the first time.
It is possible that the App Reviewer is unchecking the instagram_graph_user_media access in the authentication screen, thus giving you only access to instagram_graph_user_profile. I had the exact same error code being thrown back my way, and I did the following:
Catch the error code 10 error
Try to fetch the https://graph.instagram.com/me?fields=account_type,username&access_token=${accessToken}
If that works, then display a page that makes it clear that you have successfully connected to the Instagram User Profile (and here is your username and account type) but, if the user wants to do X they also need to approve media access, and here is a button to go and reauthenticate again.
See the image I have below.
Now, I did the above and I still got an app review failure of code 10, which means that the second fetch to only the username and account type failed, and I do not know how they could possibly have managed to do that.
They admitted issue but not fixed yet: https://developers.facebook.com/support/bugs/543633182940083/
To get approved for Instagram Basic Display:
create a Facebook test user
create an Instagram account with that FB test user
give the credentials (email/address) of the Facebook test user to the reviewer in the Instagram Basic Display submission
Basic Display API review process is so bad its beyond words. I have been hitting the brick wall of their rejections for 3 weeks and almost got bald by pulling my hair in frustration. You really have to read between the lines to get a hint of what they are doing.
Turns out what the reviewer was doing is selecting "Continue with Facebook" on the Instagram Login screen and going that route (via Facebook login) instead of entering the instagram credentials directly. Only once I realized that I was able to pin point the problem. Interestingly though testing on the Simulator was fine but the problem only became apparent once I tested on the real device. The reason - simulator doesn't have neither Facebook app nor Instagram app installed, so it behaves differently versus the device where these apps get involved in the flow via deep linking.
The bottom line:
Test on real device.
Make sure to test both the direct Instagram log in and the "Continue with Facebook" option.
Test on the device with and without the Facebook and/or Instagram app installed.
Make sure to use brand new instance of WKWebView with non persistent data store to bring up the login screen, so that it doesn't have any cookies from previous logins:
let configuration = WKWebViewConfiguration()
configuration.websiteDataStore = WKWebsiteDataStore.nonPersistent()
let webView = WKWebView(frame: .zero, configuration: configuration)
Pray the God of your choosing.
Is it possible to add a setting on Cronitor that sends an email once a cron job succeeds. Right now I only get email if a cron job fails.
This is what i have at the moment :
Alert preferences Failure tolerance Duration alerts
Alert notes
(X) Send alerts any time there is a problem
() Only send alerts if my job has consistently not run when expected...
I tried to email/contact support but now answer from Cronitor yet.
I'm one of the creators of Cronitor. I'm really sorry we somehow missed your support inquiry.
The answer is that, yes, this is possible but you cannot set this up without an API call. After the initial setup is complete (and the new alert rule is added) you can continue managing the monitor from the dashboard.
If you email support#cronitor.io again with specifics I can help you with adding this rule via the API.
How do i invoke a Microsoft Azure Scheduled Job from my serverside code?
I have a running Scheduled Job, that calls an endpoint, to send out some emails and sync some data.
I have a system, where users can send emails out to lists of emails. So instead of the user waiting xx minutes for a response from the web server, after it is done sending out emails, I would like to just call my Scheduled Job, so that the user can initiate the email sendout, but doesnt have to wait for it to finish. Sort of "Fire and forget" for the user.
How do i go around to do this? I haven't been able to find any info on how to achieve it.
Thanks in advance.
Update:
I found this documentation right after posting:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/scheduler/jobs/run
POST https://management.azure.com/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Scheduler/jobCollections/{jobCollectionName}/jobs/{jobName}/run?api-version=2016-03-01
I am however not able to find info on how to authenticate against this endpoint. But it seems like its definetly possible to do.
I'll leave the question/answer be, in case it can help anyone.
It turned out that using the azure endpoint for a Post call to invoke the scheduled job, was a good solution.
After setting the resource group and jobcollection up correctly, I got it working.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/rest/api/scheduler/jobs/run
POST https://management.azure.com/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourceGroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.Scheduler/jobCollections/{jobCollectionName}/jobs/{jobName}/run?api-version=2016-03-01
Hello I'm developing a web app where the user needs to verify that they are the "Owner" of the website. I know there is code verification but how would I check if that verification is on their site without over complicating the verification method?
Also, I'm thinking about giving the site owner an hour to verify, how would I automatically detect if the hour is over and be able to delete them from the database?
The way Google or Yahoo do this is to require the webmaster to create a file with a special cryptic name (the file length can be 0), which is generated by Google/Yahoo. Could be something like "dsaa6fd4sgfdsf324gd.html". So you generate such a unique (name) string for each websit eto be verified, store it in the DB, and then you go and try to GET it from that site. If the GET succeeds you can set "verified=true" in the DB for that site and file name.
To answer the 1hr question we'd have to know what technology you are using. There are many options to run timed background jobs from a web application. Usually you write the job details into the database, and have a background daemon check the DB periodically and execute any pending jobs. You could tell it (that daemon) to execute a job one hour later to see if the file (see above) exists. Well, you have to do it that way in any case, it's no use simultaneously telling the webmaster to create that file and check for it right away :)
I am trying to signup to the Azure CTP but am finding the whole process real non user friendly. On this http://www.microsoft.com/windowsazure/getstarted/ web page it gives me a link to go to get a token, but when I click it doesn't appear to do anything. It takes me to another page but doesn't tell me if a token has been sent or I have to do something else.
On the dashboard of Microsoft Connect it tells me my status in Azure is 'Participating'. What does this mean? I am not participating because I don't have a token. The whole process is very frustrating!
Is it possible to contact an actual person?
It sounds like you already submitted a request for a token. I tried to sign up a week ago or so and I haven't received anything yet. However, I did get my SQL Azure license and it seems to be working well.
Also, you are absolutely correct, their website is a mess and it's very hard to figure things out. I hope they will be cleaning it up soon!
And I don't think they have any kind of support setup yet.