This website uses Cookies. Click Accept to agree to our website's cookie use as described in our Privacy Policy. Click Preferences to customize your cookie settings.
This should be resolved as of 2021. When using swagger: "2.0", the
portal does not allow type: "http". Only basic, apiKey, oauth2 are
allowed. Hence, the workaround is to use type: "apiKey" and name it as
Bearer. When using openapi: "3.0.x", the port...
When using swagger: "2.0", the portal does not allow type: "http". Only
basic, apiKey, oauth2 are allowed. Hence, the workaround is to use type:
"apiKey" and name it as Bearer. When using openapi: "3.0.x", the portal
should allow type: "http" and sch...
Great question - we don't have a supported way to do this without manual
intervention today. We do have plans to enable some automation scenarios
similar to this in the future, but don't have specific details or
timeline at this time. It is a top-of-...
There isn't a direct experience today - I believe the closest experience
would be to use tags, which should be recognized in most cases
(and not rendered), but that might not be honored/guaranteed for every
browser, search engine, or other interpret...
I'm understanding the vulnerability as that a malicious actor may
construct a URL with a 'trusted' hostname (e.g. for a published portal)
that is allowed to redirect the user to a different (malicious) URL with
a different host. Thank you for reporti...