Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by withinboredom 1098 days ago
GraphQL (as in the language spec) offers no way to perform authz. Just because there are non-standardized extensions out there for some languages, doesn't mean it is available in whatever language you're using.
1 comments

Ok, but that’s true whether or not you use GQL.
Sure. I could respond with a 4xx code because you’re not authorized for that field. Ah, but maybe you want to know which field? Too bad GQL doesn’t really support that.
GraphQL has strongly typed errors unlike REST. It is very akin to the Result type in many languages in that you are forced to handle errors even when writing the query, and the query will simply not compile if you don't.

For example, the Pothos library implements this pattern automatically:

    type Error {
      message: String!
    }
    
    type Query {
      hello(name: String!): QueryHelloResult
    }
    
    union QueryHelloResult = Error | QueryHelloSuccess
    
    type QueryHelloSuccess {
      data: String!
    }
    
This field can be queried using fragments like:

    query {
      hello(name: "World") {
        __typename
        ... on Error {
          message
        }
        ... on QueryHelloSuccess {
          data
        }
      }
    } 

https://pothos-graphql.dev/docs/plugins/errors
But now I’m most likely returning a 2xx response. There are asshole corporate middle boxes somewhere that will cache it. If I return a 4xx response, from experience (albeit nearly 5 years ago) I’ll crash your client. Now what?

If someone has solved the asshole corporate middle box problem using GQL, that’s really good news.

Authorization errors can go in the errors array which has a path reference in the standard.

You generally don't want to use HTTP error codes with field level errors in GQL.

So still a 200? Or a 202, 206, 207?
401 or 403. Why is this a question?
Because there may be fields requested correctly alongside some requested incorrectly