[integration] add JWT sections #152
Conversation
Deploying docs with
|
| Latest commit: |
eb47632
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://adf79e0b.docs-7wm.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://integration-jwt-support.docs-7wm.pages.dev |
WalkthroughAdds comprehensive JWT authentication documentation (integration guide, FAQ, and blog post), updates the Integration API doc with a new Authentication section and comparison to Basic Auth, clarifies Local Server only supports Basic Auth, appends a Support note to client-libraries, and adds new navigation entries in mkdocs.yml. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes
Possibly related PRs
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (4)
docs/integration/authentication.md (2)
24-24: Add language identifiers to empty code blocks.Three code blocks (lines 24, 77, 94) are missing language specifiers. While these appear to be endpoint/format documentation rather than executable code, specifying a language (e.g.,
bashfor curl endpoints,textfor placeholders) will improve documentation rendering and consistency.- ``` + ```text POST /3rdparty/v1/auth/token - ``` + ```Also applies to: 77-77, 94-94
222-242: Consider using fenced code blocks for consistency with markdown lint standards.Lines with indented code blocks (titles at lines 222, 246, 303, 378, 392) should use fenced code blocks for consistency with MD046 style guidelines. This is a minor formatting improvement that makes the code more maintainable.
For example, lines 222-230 use indented syntax with a title attribute:
- ```bash title="Generate JWT Token" + ```bash title="Generate JWT Token"However, since these code blocks are within MkDocs tabs (
=== "cURL") and use title attributes, they may require the indented style for proper rendering. Verify with your MkDocs theme before applying changes.Please verify that the indented code blocks within tabs render correctly with your MkDocs Material theme and title attributes. If fenced blocks break formatting, this can be safely ignored.
Also applies to: 246-299, 303-358, 378-420, 392-420
docs/faq/authentication.md (2)
1-1: Reconsider the ❌ emoji for FAQ title.The cross/X mark emoji (❌) typically signals negation or error, which is semantically inconsistent with an informational FAQ page. Consider replacing it with a more neutral emoji (e.g., ❓, 🔍, or removing it entirely).
-# ❌ FAQ - Authentication +# FAQ - Authentication
214-214: Add language identifiers to empty code blocks.Lines 214 and 323 contain fenced code blocks without language specifiers. Adding a language tag will improve syntax highlighting consistency.
- ``` + ```text header.payload.signature - ``` + ```Also applies to: 323-323
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
docs/faq/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/api.md(2 hunks)docs/integration/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/client-libraries.md(1 hunks)mkdocs.yml(2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.29.0)
docs/faq/authentication.md
[high] 103-103: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 243-243: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 314-314: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
docs/integration/authentication.md
[high] 84-85: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 99-100: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 233-234: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 57-57: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/faq/authentication.md
[style] ~416-~416: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 21 exclamation marks for a text that’s 8353 characters long)
Context: ...ite.encrypt(jwt_token.encode()) ``` !!! tip "Security Best Practices" - Use...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
docs/integration/api.md
[style] ~23-~23: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 6 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2122 characters long)
Context: ...ation with fine-grained access control !!! tip "Recommendation" For new integr...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
docs/faq/authentication.md
214-214: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
323-323: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
docs/integration/authentication.md
24-24: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
77-77: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
94-94: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
222-222: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
246-246: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
303-303: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
378-378: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
392-392: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (8)
docs/integration/client-libraries.md (1)
24-30: Good addition to guide users to support channels.The new Support section clearly directs users to GitHub Issues and documentation, improving discoverability of resources. The placement and formatting align well with the existing content.
docs/integration/api.md (2)
3-3: Verify product name change consistency.The product name changed from "The SMS Gateway for Android™" to "The SMSGate". Ensure this name change is applied consistently across all documentation files and is intentional (e.g., rebranding effort).
Is this a broader documentation rebranding, or should the name remain "SMS Gateway for Android™" elsewhere?
17-40: Strong Authentication section that aligns well with new guides.The new section provides clear guidance recommending JWT for new integrations, includes a helpful comparison table, and cross-references the new authentication documentation. The structure effectively surfaces the security and access control benefits of JWT.
docs/integration/authentication.md (2)
438-513: Excellent error handling example with production-ready token management.The
SMSGatewayClientclass demonstrates best practices for token lifecycle management, including automatic refresh before expiration, graceful 401 retry, and proper error handling. This is a valuable reference implementation.
111-216: Comprehensive scope documentation with clear endpoint mappings.The scope tables are well-organized by category (Messages, Devices, Webhooks, Settings, Logs, Token Management) and include practical endpoint-to-scope mappings. This clarity will help developers implement least-privilege access correctly.
docs/faq/authentication.md (2)
7-58: Clear migration and security guidance with practical examples.The migration steps, scope explanation, and security comparison between JWT and Basic Auth are well-presented. The incremental migration approach (lines 368-379) is especially helpful for teams with existing Basic Auth integrations.
Also applies to: 66-91, 171-199
200-420: Comprehensive error troubleshooting covering all common JWT scenarios.The troubleshooting sections effectively cover token lifecycle issues (expiration, revocation, invalid tokens) and scope problems, with practical debugging steps. The Python code examples for token inspection and secure storage (lines 311-320, 408-415) are particularly valuable.
mkdocs.yml (1)
47-47: Navigation structure properly surfaced new authentication documentation.Both navigation entries follow existing patterns and are logically placed:
- Integration > Authentication immediately after API (logical flow for API consumers)
- FAQ > Authentication alongside other FAQ topics
The file paths correctly reference the new documentation files.
Also applies to: 79-79
capcom6
force-pushed
the
integration/jwt-support
branch
from
7796228 to
7f1e4a2
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
docs/faq/authentication.md (1)
172-172: Add language specifications to fenced code blocks.Code blocks at these lines are missing language identifiers. Per markdownlint (MD040), add language specifications:
- ``` + ```bash echo "eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9..." | tr '.' '\n' - ``` + ```Also applies to: 281-281
docs/integration/authentication.md (1)
24-24: Add language specifications to endpoint and plain-text code blocks.Code blocks at these lines are missing language identifiers. While these appear to be endpoint paths or plain text, consider adding appropriate language hints for consistency:
-``` +```txt POST /3rdparty/v1/auth/token -``` +```This addresses markdownlint rule MD040 (fenced-code-language).
Also applies to: 77-77, 94-94
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
docs/faq/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/api.md(2 hunks)docs/integration/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/client-libraries.md(1 hunks)mkdocs.yml(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- mkdocs.yml
- docs/integration/client-libraries.md
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.29.0)
docs/faq/authentication.md
[high] 91-91: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 201-201: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 272-272: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
docs/integration/authentication.md
[high] 84-85: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 99-100: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 234-235: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 57-57: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/integration/api.md
[style] ~23-~23: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 6 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2122 characters long)
Context: ...ation with fine-grained access control !!! tip "Recommendation" For new integr...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
docs/faq/authentication.md
[style] ~373-~373: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 18 exclamation marks for a text that’s 6958 characters long)
Context: ...ite.encrypt(jwt_token.encode()) ``` !!! tip "Security Best Practices" - Use...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
docs/faq/authentication.md
172-172: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
281-281: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
docs/integration/authentication.md
24-24: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
77-77: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
94-94: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
223-223: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
247-247: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
304-304: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
379-379: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
393-393: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (8)
docs/integration/api.md (1)
3-3: Brand rebranding and Authentication section additions are well-structured.The content is clear and provides good guidance toward JWT authentication. The comparison table effectively communicates the security and access control advantages. Cross-references to the new Authentication Guide are appropriate.
Please verify that:
- The brand name "The SMSGate" is used consistently across all three documentation files in this PR
- Cross-references to
authentication.md,index.md, andclient-libraries.mdresolve correctly after merge- The
mkdocs.ymlnavigation update (mentioned in the PR summary) includes entries for the new authentication pagesAlso applies to: 17-40
docs/faq/authentication.md (2)
58-58: Verify anchor reference to JWT Scopes.The cross-reference on Line 58 links to
../integration/authentication.md#jwt-scopes-. Please confirm that the target anchor (## JWT Scopes 🔍) exists in the new authentication guide and uses the exact heading format expected by the documentation engine.
7-46: Comprehensive migration and token management guidance is excellent.The step-by-step migration approach with before/after code examples, token management patterns (including the refresh strategy with exponential backoff considerations), and scopes documentation are well-structured and practical. The Python class example demonstrates proper error handling and token lifecycle management. Code examples in multiple languages (Python, cURL, JavaScript) are a strong addition.
Also applies to: 54-138
docs/integration/authentication.md (5)
111-217: JWT Scopes and Endpoint Assignment tables are comprehensive and well-organized.The breakdown of scopes by resource type (Messages, Devices, Webhooks, Settings, Logs, Token Management) with clear descriptions and access levels, combined with precise endpoint-to-scope mappings, provides excellent reference material for developers implementing fine-grained access control.
219-359: Multi-language code examples with proper error handling are excellent.The provision of token generation and usage examples in cURL, Python, and JavaScript, including both success and error paths, significantly improves developer onboarding. The Python and JavaScript examples demonstrate proper header formatting and response handling. These examples effectively complement the conceptual documentation.
423-514: Error handling example demonstrates best practices clearly.The
SMSGatewayClientclass provides a practical, production-ready pattern for:
- Proactive token refresh before expiration (5-minute window)
- Automatic retry on 401 responses
- Expiration time parsing and comparison
- Proper exception handling with informative messages
This example serves as an excellent template for developers implementing JWT authentication.
516-532: Security Considerations section is thorough.The guidance on token security (treat as passwords, HTTPS, short TTL, scope limitation, secure storage, revocation) and client security (validation, error handling, storage, CSRF protection) covers critical attack vectors. This is important defensive guidance.
534-539: Verify all See Also cross-references resolve correctly.Lines 536-539 reference related documentation. Please confirm:
api.mdexists and is updated (confirmed in this PR ✓)index.mdexists (should verify)client-libraries.mdexists (mentioned in PR summary)../faq/authentication.mdexists (confirmed in this PR ✓)Additionally, verify that
mkdocs.ymlhas been updated to surface these new authentication pages in the navigation hierarchy.
capcom6
force-pushed
the
integration/jwt-support
branch
from
523770e to
34df2a5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 5
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
docs/faq/authentication.md (1)
1-1: Fix FAQ header emoji.The ❌ emoji suggests an error state and is inappropriate for a FAQ. As noted in a previous review, consider using ✓, 🤔, ❓, or removing the emoji entirely to align with documentation tone and consistency. This addresses the concern from the earlier review feedback.
Apply this diff to fix the header:
-# ❌ FAQ - Authentication +# 🤔 FAQ - AuthenticationAlternatively, you can remove the emoji entirely:
-# ❌ FAQ - Authentication +# FAQ - Authentication
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
docs/faq/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/api.md(2 hunks)docs/integration/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/client-libraries.md(1 hunks)mkdocs.yml(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- mkdocs.yml
- docs/integration/client-libraries.md
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.29.0)
docs/integration/authentication.md
[high] 84-85: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 99-100: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 234-235: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 57-57: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/integration/api.md
[style] ~23-~23: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 6 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2122 characters long)
Context: ...ation with fine-grained access control !!! tip "Recommendation" For new integr...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
docs/faq/authentication.md
[style] ~373-~373: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 18 exclamation marks for a text that’s 6958 characters long)
Context: ...ite.encrypt(jwt_token.encode()) ``` !!! tip "Security Best Practices" - Use...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
docs/integration/authentication.md
24-24: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
77-77: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
94-94: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
223-223: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
247-247: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
304-304: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
379-379: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
393-393: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
docs/faq/authentication.md
172-172: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
281-281: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (3)
docs/integration/api.md (2)
3-3: Branding update looks good.The change from "Android SMS Gateway" to "The SMSGate" is consistent throughout the PR.
17-40: Authentication section is well-structured.The new Authentication section clearly presents both authentication methods with a strong recommendation for JWT. The comparison table effectively highlights the security and access control advantages of JWT over Basic Auth. Cross-references to the detailed authentication guide and client libraries provide good navigation paths for users.
docs/integration/authentication.md (1)
57-57: Gitleaks warnings about exposed tokens are false positives.The Gitleaks scanner flagged apparent token exposure in curl examples (lines 84-85, 99-100, 234-235) and an apparent API key at line 57. These are intentional placeholder/dummy tokens used throughout the documentation for instructional purposes—not real credentials. The token
eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9...is a standard placeholder consistently used to show format and structure. This is standard and appropriate for API documentation.No changes needed. These are common false positives for documentation examples.
Also applies to: 84-85, 99-100, 234-235
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
docs/faq/local-server.md (1)
37-37: Optional: Add emoji for section header consistency.Line 33 includes an emoji (
:material-key:) in its section header, but line 37 does not. Consider adding a lock or shield emoji for visual consistency with the document's style, if your guidelines prefer it.-## 🔐 What authentication methods are supported in Local Server mode? +## 🔐 What authentication methods are supported in Local Server mode?(The emoji is already present in the provided code; this is purely for consistency review.)
docs/getting-started/local-server.md (1)
16-17: Optional: Enhance warning with actionable guidance on where to find JWT support.The warning clearly states the limitation, and the "See Also" section (lines 62–66) references alternative modes. For maximum user clarity, you could optionally enhance the warning to mention these alternatives directly, similar to the FAQ entry (line 39): "For JWT authentication, please use Public Cloud Server or Private Server modes."
- Local Server mode **only supports Basic Authentication**. JWT authentication is not available in this mode. + Local Server mode **only supports Basic Authentication**. JWT authentication is not available in this mode. For JWT support, see [Public Cloud Server Mode](./public-cloud-server.md) or [Private Server Mode](./private-server.md).
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
docs/faq/local-server.md(1 hunks)docs/getting-started/local-server.md(1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (2)
docs/faq/local-server.md (1)
37-39: Clear, actionable guidance on Local Server authentication limitations.The new FAQ section effectively communicates that Local Server only supports Basic Auth and directs users to appropriate alternatives for JWT. Well positioned and helpful.
docs/getting-started/local-server.md (1)
16-17: Well-positioned authentication limitation warning.Placing this warning immediately after the basic authentication credentials (step 4) is excellent UX. Users learn about the limitation at precisely the right moment—before they might attempt JWT configuration. The message is clear and consistent with the FAQ section.
capcom6
force-pushed
the
integration/jwt-support
branch
from
eb205d3 to
ad36f70
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md (1)
1-10: Consider removing AI generation attribution from author field.Including "SMSGate Team LLM / Claude Sonnet 4.5" in the author field may be unexpected in a production blog post. Either attribute to a human author or remove the LLM reference entirely.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.30.0)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md
[high] 247-248: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 178-178: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 193-193: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 221-221: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 61-61: Uncovered a JSON Web Token, which may lead to unauthorized access to web applications and sensitive user data.
(jwt)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md
55-55: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
60-60: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
98-98: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
135-135: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
192-192: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
220-220: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (1)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md (1)
540-561: Add missing import for jwt module in troubleshooting example.Line 548 uses
jwt.decode()without importing the jwt module. Add the import at the start of that code block.Apply this diff:
# Debug token validation from datetime import datetime +import jwt try:Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
docs/assets/blog/jwt-authentication-migration.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
docs/blog/index.md(1 hunks)docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.30.0)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md
[high] 65-65: Uncovered a JSON Web Token, which may lead to unauthorized access to web applications and sensitive user data.
(jwt)
[high] 252-253: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 184-184: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 198-198: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 226-226: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md
102-102: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
139-139: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
197-197: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
225-225: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
592-592: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
593-593: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
594-594: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
595-595: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
598-598: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
599-599: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
600-600: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
601-601: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
604-604: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
605-605: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
606-606: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
607-607: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
610-610: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
611-611: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
612-612: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
613-613: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
616-616: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
617-617: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
618-618: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
619-619: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (5)
docs/blog/index.md (1)
8-8: LGTM!The new blog categories (Authentication and Security) and RSS subscription link are well-integrated and align with the JWT documentation expansion in this PR.
Also applies to: 13-13, 18-18
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md (4)
1-60: Content and structure are excellent.The blog post is well-organized with clear sections, practical code examples across multiple languages, and proper JWT education. Front matter is correct, and tone is appropriate for developer documentation.
478-486: Previous critical issue is resolved.The undefined
jtivariable from the prior review has been fixed by adding it as a function parameter on line 479. The function now correctly accepts and usesjtifor token revocation.
426-486: Security best practices section is comprehensive and well-presented.The four security sections (token storage, minimal TTL, scope limitation, token revocation) provide clear guidance with good/bad patterns. Examples are practical and show proper error handling.
261-425: Migration strategy sections are well-structured and practical.The three-phase approach (dual auth, token management, full JWT) provides a clear upgrade path. Code examples are complete, properly handle errors, and include sensible practices like the 60-second expiration buffer in the token manager.
capcom6
force-pushed
the
integration/jwt-support
branch
from
0f0df95 to
eb47632
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (5)
docs/integration/authentication.md (3)
24-26: ** Add language specification to fenced code block.**The endpoint block is missing a language identifier, preventing proper syntax highlighting. This was flagged in a previous review.
### Endpoint -``` +```http POST /3rdparty/v1/auth/token -``` +```
77-79: ** Add language specification to fenced code block.**The Authorization header format block is missing a language identifier. This was flagged in a previous review.
### Authorization Header Format -``` +```http Authorization: Bearer <your-jwt-token> -``` +```
94-96: ** Add language specification to fenced code block.**The DELETE endpoint block is missing a language identifier. This was flagged in a previous review.
### Revoking Tokens To revoke a token before it expires, make a DELETE request to the token endpoint. -``` +```http DELETE /3rdparty/v1/auth/token/{jti} -``` +```docs/faq/authentication.md (1)
1-1: Change FAQ header emoji to be more appropriate.The ❌ (cross mark) emoji suggests an error or negative state, which is inconsistent with a FAQ section meant to be helpful and informative. Use a more neutral or positive emoji like ✓, 🤔, ❓, or remove the emoji entirely.
-# ❌ FAQ - Authentication +# 🔐 FAQ - Authenticationdocs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md (1)
591-619: Fix nested list indentation to use 2 spaces instead of 4.The migration checklist uses 4-space indentation for nested items (all 28 nested items), but markdownlint requires 2-space indentation. This was flagged in the previous review and remains unresolved.
Apply this diff to fix the indentation throughout the checklist:
- [ ] **Week 1: Preparation** - - [ ] Review JWT documentation - - [ ] Test token generation in development - - [ ] Identify all services using Basic Auth - - [ ] Plan scope requirements per service + - [ ] Review JWT documentation + - [ ] Test token generation in development + - [ ] Identify all services using Basic Auth + - [ ] Plan scope requirements per service - [ ] **Week 2: Implementation** - - [ ] Implement token management class - - [ ] Add JWT support to existing clients - - [ ] Create dual-auth fallback mechanism - - [ ] Set up monitoring for auth errors + - [ ] Implement token management class + - [ ] Add JWT support to existing clients + - [ ] Create dual-auth fallback mechanism + - [ ] Set up monitoring for auth errorsApply the same 4-to-2-space conversion to remaining Week 3-5 sections.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
docs/assets/blog/jwt-authentication-migration.pngis excluded by!**/*.png
📒 Files selected for processing (9)
docs/blog/index.md(1 hunks)docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md(1 hunks)docs/faq/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/faq/local-server.md(1 hunks)docs/getting-started/local-server.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/api.md(2 hunks)docs/integration/authentication.md(1 hunks)docs/integration/client-libraries.md(1 hunks)mkdocs.yml(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- docs/faq/local-server.md
- docs/getting-started/local-server.md
- docs/integration/client-libraries.md
- mkdocs.yml
- docs/blog/index.md
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks (8.30.0)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md
[high] 65-65: Uncovered a JSON Web Token, which may lead to unauthorized access to web applications and sensitive user data.
(jwt)
[high] 184-184: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 198-198: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 226-226: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 252-253: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
docs/integration/authentication.md
[high] 57-57: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
[high] 84-85: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 99-100: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
[high] 234-235: Discovered a potential authorization token provided in a curl command header, which could compromise the curl accessed resource.
(curl-auth-header)
🪛 LanguageTool
docs/integration/api.md
[style] ~23-~23: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 6 exclamation marks for a text that’s 2122 characters long)
Context: ...ation with fine-grained access control !!! tip "Recommendation" For new integr...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
docs/faq/authentication.md
[style] ~373-~373: Using many exclamation marks might seem excessive (in this case: 18 exclamation marks for a text that’s 6958 characters long)
Context: ...ite.encrypt(jwt_token.encode()) ``` !!! tip "Security Best Practices" - Use...
(EN_EXCESSIVE_EXCLAMATION)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.18.1)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md
102-102: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
139-139: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
197-197: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
225-225: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
592-592: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
593-593: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
594-594: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
595-595: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
598-598: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
599-599: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
600-600: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
601-601: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
604-604: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
605-605: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
606-606: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
607-607: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
610-610: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
611-611: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
612-612: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
613-613: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
616-616: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
617-617: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
618-618: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
619-619: Unordered list indentation
Expected: 2; Actual: 4
(MD007, ul-indent)
docs/faq/authentication.md
102-102: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
139-139: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
197-197: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
225-225: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
docs/integration/authentication.md
24-24: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
77-77: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
94-94: Fenced code blocks should have a language specified
(MD040, fenced-code-language)
223-223: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
247-247: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
304-304: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
379-379: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
393-393: Code block style
Expected: fenced; Actual: indented
(MD046, code-block-style)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (1)
- GitHub Check: Cloudflare Pages
🔇 Additional comments (3)
docs/blog/posts/2025-12-09_jwt-authentication-migration.md (1)
479-486: Inconsistent token revocation example across documentation.The
revoke_token(token, jti)function signature requiring both parameters is inconsistent with the authentication.md example (lines 99-101), which shows revocation using only the token. Additionally, requiring jti as a separate parameter is unusual when the token likely contains this information internally.Consider simplifying this example to match the simpler pattern shown in the authentication documentation, or clarify why both parameters are necessary.
Can you verify the correct API pattern for token revocation and ensure consistency across all code examples in the documentation?
docs/integration/api.md (1)
1-40: Content and structure look good.The new Authentication section clearly articulates the difference between JWT and Basic Auth with a helpful comparison table. The recommendation for new integrations is appropriately emphasized. Cross-references to related documentation are in place.
docs/integration/authentication.md (1)
219-245: No action required. The file already uses fenced code blocks with language identifiers consistently throughout all tabbed sections. The indentation visible in lines 223–245 and other sections is proper markdown nesting for tabbed content (4-space indentation within=== "Tab"blocks), not indented code blocks. All code examples properly use triple-backtick fencing with language specifiers (bash,python,javascript), which aligns with both the file's style and markdownlint requirements.Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.
Summary by CodeRabbit
✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.