add support for IAM authorizers #41
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@swift-server-bot test this please |
|
@swift-server-bot add to allowlist |
|
@sebsto looks good, some small formatting issues (you can run the soundness task locally with docker) |
tomerd
approved these changes
Dec 15, 2023
auto-merge was automatically disabled
December 15, 2023 19:43
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
|
@tomerd soundness checks are OK now. |
|
thank you @sebsto |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
add support for
iamauthorizer in addition to JWTSee #40
Motivation:
I need to deploy Swift Lambda function protected by IAM
Modifications:
iamelement insiderequestContextjwtelement as optional (this is a breaking change for existing application consuming this property)Result:
We can use API Gateway with IAM authentication.
Existing code using
jwtauthentication will need to handle the optional (but marking it as non optional was incorrect)