Status Update
Comments
am...@google.com <am...@google.com> #2
Hello,
Thank you for reaching out to us!
I tried to reproduce this issue at my end. However, I am getting the intended behavior.
Please check the
Please let me know if that helped you with your use case and if there is anything else you would need assistance with.
Thank you
da...@nillio.com <da...@nillio.com> #3
> Scheme
> JavaScript origins must use the HTTPS scheme, not plain HTTP. Localhost URIs (including localhost IP address URIs) are exempt from this rule.
Subdomains of localhost (ie. foo.localhost) *are* "Localhost URIs" but are not currently exempt from the rule, contrary to the documentation.
48...@mail.muni.cz <48...@mail.muni.cz> #4
Hello,
Thank you for reaching out to us with your request.
We have duly noted your feedback and will thoroughly validate it. While we cannot provide an estimated time of implementation or guarantee the fulfillment of the issue, please be assured that your input is highly valued. Your feedback enables us to enhance our products and services.
We appreciate your continued trust and support in improving our Google Cloud Platform products. In case you want to report a new issue, Please do not hesitate to create a new issue on the
Once again, we sincerely appreciate your valuable feedback; Thank you for your understanding and collaboration.
se...@monetplus.cz <se...@monetplus.cz> #5
se...@gmail.com <se...@gmail.com> #6
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #7
em...@springmerchant.com <em...@springmerchant.com> #8
na...@gmail.com <na...@gmail.com> #9
It will be good to either have the capability to extend Google API Gateway with custom code (preferred) or have a way to call an API in the backend to perform this access control.
dr...@gmail.com <dr...@gmail.com> #10
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]> #11
ba...@gmail.com <ba...@gmail.com> #12
al...@gmail.com <al...@gmail.com> #13
pe...@gmail.com <pe...@gmail.com> #14
ol...@orientedsoft.com <ol...@orientedsoft.com> #15
ol...@orientedsoft.com <ol...@orientedsoft.com> #16
su...@google.com <su...@google.com>
su...@google.com <su...@google.com> #17
Hello,
Thank you for reaching us.
I have reported this again to the team. Any further update from the team will be notified here.Note that there are no ETAs or guarantees of implementation for feature requests. All communication regarding this feature request is to be done here.
mi...@gmail.com <mi...@gmail.com> #18
Are there any updates?
Best regards,
hi...@gmail.com <hi...@gmail.com> #19
Are there any updates?
rl...@minddoc.de <rl...@minddoc.de> #20
vi...@orientedsoft.com <vi...@orientedsoft.com> #21
ro...@fungiball.io <ro...@fungiball.io> #22
Is there a workaround that you guys have put in place to do this ?
Or do you check the authorization in the cloud function ?
Description
Requesting a similar capability provided by AWS API Gateway Lambda authorizers (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/apigateway/latest/developerguide/apigateway-use-lambda-authorizer.html ) for GCP API Gateway. In short, provide the ability to support customize authorization at the API Gateway level via Cloud Function (or other). This would allow teams to use all of the powerful features of API Gateway without having to modify their current auth implementation if it’s not using JWT (e.g. opaque session token sent via cookie).
How this might work:
If applicable, reasons why alternative solutions are not sufficient:
Other information (workarounds you have tried, documentation consulted, etc):