-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 64
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
doc: proposal for error message improvements #1662
Merged
binbin-li
merged 8 commits into
ratify-project:dev
from
yizha1:proposal_errorimprovements
Aug 8, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2000c11
doc: proposal for error message improvements
yizha1 9dc9e82
update
yizha1 70ba627
update
yizha1 1d12f7f
update
yizha1 4ae4332
update
yizha1 a494009
update per comments
yizha1 1401080
update per comments
yizha1 4bbd9f1
Merge branch 'dev' into proposal_errorimprovements
binbin-li File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ | ||
# Error messages improvements | ||
|
||
## Problem/Motivation | ||
|
||
Error messages are crucial because they provide specific information about what went wrong, helping users quickly identify and resolve issues. Detailed error messages can pinpoint the exact part of the configuration or code that caused the problem. Error messages can include links or references to documentation, guiding users on how to fix the issue promptly. While testing the Ratify policy for signature verification, we noticed that some error messages were difficult to comprehend from the user perspective. | ||
|
||
Error message example 1: | ||
|
||
```text | ||
time=2024-07-17T16:28:16.939576441Z level=warning msg=Original Error: (Original Error: (HEAD "https:/ | ||
roacr.azurecr.io/v2/net-monitor/manifests/v2": GET "https://roacr.azurecr.io/oauth2/token? | ||
scope=repository%3Anet-monitor%3Apull&service=roacr.azurecr.io": response status code 401: unauthorized: | ||
authentication required, visit https://aka.ms/acr/authorization for more information.), Error: repository | ||
operation failure, Code: REPOSITORY_OPERATION_FAILURE, Plugin Name: oras), Error: get subject descriptor | ||
failure, Code: GET_SUBJECT_DESCRIPTOR_FAILURE, Plugin Name: oras, Component Type: referrerStore, Detail: | ||
failed to resolve the subject descriptor component-type=referrerStore go.version=go1.21.10 namespace= | ||
trace-id=34b27888-5402-443e-9836-77124c840561 | ||
``` | ||
|
||
The above example indicated the an error happened, however, a warning level was set for the log. The error message was set to the field `msg`. It contained nested errors. The first original error message correctly described the source of the problem "401 unauthorized" and pointed to a document for resolution, however, errors following the original error were redundant and not well formatted, thus complicated the overall message. The overall message failed to describe the context of the error, although "401 unauthorized" explained the reason, but did this error happen during signature verification or else? What does the `subject` mean? | ||
|
||
Error message example 2: | ||
|
||
```text | ||
"verifierReports": [ | ||
{ | ||
"subject": "docker.io/library/hello-world@sha256:1408fec50309afee38f3535383f5b09419e6dc0925bc69891e79d84cc4cdce6", | ||
"isSuccess": false, | ||
"message": "verification failed: Error: no verifier report, Code: NO_VERIFIER _REPORT, Component Type: | ||
executor, Description: No verifier report was generatec preventing access to the registry, or the absence | ||
of appropriate verifiers corresponding to the referenced image artifacts." | ||
} | ||
] | ||
``` | ||
|
||
When Ratify completes artifact verification, the result is returned to the policy engine in the format of the json object `verifierReports`. The `verifierReports` is also recorded in an INFO log of Ratify. If `isSuccess` field is set to `false`, the `message` field is set to error messages. In above example, the message is not well formatted and lacked clarity on the problem, its cause, and remediation methods. It's hard for users to understand in what context the error happened and what users need to do. For example, is it an error for signature verification? What does "no verifier report" mean? We also observed that the `verifierReports` contains different supported fields when compared with the Ratify Config policy and Ratify Rego policy, which is inconsistent. | ||
|
||
Error message example 3: | ||
|
||
```text | ||
Error from server (Forbidden): admission webhook "validation.gatekeeper.sh" denied the request: | ||
[ratify-constraint] Subject failed verification: huishwabbit1.azurecr.io/ | ||
test8may24@sha256:c780036bc8a6f577910bf01151013aaa18e255057a1653c76d8f3572aa3f6ff6 | ||
``` | ||
|
||
The policy engine, for instance, Gatekeeper, has produced the above error message using a constraint template supplied by Ratify. It is the responsibility of the policy engine to tailor the constraint template for proper error messages to their requirements, however, it requires Ratify to provided useful verification reports as data inputs. In this example, the error message is not clear to users regarding the meaning of the term `Subject`, and fails to specify the context of failure, such as whether it was related to signature verification or SBOM verification or other verifications. Additionally, reasons behind the error were not provided. Furthermore, users may not be able to locate this error in the complete K8s logs to view more logs during error happened, because only artifact digest was shown and it is not enough to pinpoint the exact error in K8s logs. | ||
|
||
Further findings covering a range of cases such as Key Management Provider (KMP), Store, Verifier, Policy configuration, access control, and signature verification issues are recorded at [Ratify Error Handling Scenarios.md](../discussion/Ratify%20Error%20Handling%20Scenarios.md) | ||
|
||
In summary, the areas that need enhancement include: | ||
|
||
- Error messages similar to the first example will appear in Ratify logs. These may be found in the logs of Ratify Pods if Ratify is set up as a Kubernetes service, or they might be output by the Ratify CLI. The primary concerns include excessive nested errors, lacking error context, and not user-friendly error descriptions. | ||
- Error messages contained within `verifierReports` that are sent back to the policy engine, as seen in the second example. These error messages share issues similar to those mentioned for the first example. The policy engine can customize their Rego policies using the messages inside the `verifierReports` to return to users in the logs or UI of the policy engine. | ||
- Ratify failed to provide sufficient information for the policy engine to generate error messages, which is demonstrated in the third example. | ||
|
||
The document aims to provide solutions and guidelines to improve error messages. | ||
|
||
## Scenarios | ||
|
||
### Error messages displayed in the Ratify logs | ||
|
||
Alice works as a DevOps engineer at Contoso. She set up tasks to deploy containerized apps into Kubernetes clusters. The cluster is assigned with the policy to deny the deployment of images that don't pass policy evaluation including verification of signature, SBOM, vulnerability reports and other image metadata. Alice knows that behind the scene, it is the Ratify conduct the verification and returned results as reports to the policy engine. When policy evaluation fails, Alice sees clear and actionable error messages in Ratify logs. The error messages contain concise error descriptions, error reasons and error recommendations, allowing her to act on errors promptly. | ||
|
||
### Error messages displayed in verification reports used by the policy engine | ||
|
||
Bob is a software engineer on Contoso's Policy team, writing policies used during admissions in Kubernetes clusters. These policies evaluate images based on verifier reports generated by Ratify. If policy evaluation fails, Ratify sends back the reports with error messages to the policy engine. The reports, in JSON format, provide structured error messages that Bob utilizes to create clear and actionable error messages for the policy engine. These messages include concise error descriptions, error reasons, and error recommendations, allowing policy users to act on errors promptly. | ||
|
||
### Error messages returned by Ratify CLI commands | ||
|
||
Gina is a software engineer on the CI/CD team at Contoso, where she creates pipeline tasks incorporating Ratify CLI commands to assess artifacts according to policies. Should a policy check not pass, the corresponding artifacts are prevented from progressing in the pipeline. When policy evaluation fails, Gina sees concise, clear and actionable error messages returned by Ratify CLI commands. The error messages contain concise error descriptions, error reasons and error recommendations, allowing her to act on errors promptly. | ||
|
||
## Proposed solutions | ||
|
||
We won’t create new error message guidelines; instead, we’ll refer to the existing ones. [Azure CLI Error Handling Guidelines](https://github.com/Azure/azure-cli/blob/dev/doc/error_handling_guidelines.md#error-message) outlined a general pattern for error messages, consisting of: | ||
|
||
1. __What the error is.__ | ||
2. __Why it happens.__ | ||
3. __What users need to do to fix it.__ | ||
|
||
The proposed improvements for Ratify error messages adhere to this general pattern and the detailed DOs and DON'Ts provided in the guidelines. The error message will also include an error code. Since Ratify already supports a list of error codes, these can be used to search for remediation in the troubleshooting guide. For example, search error code `CERT_INVALID` in [the troubleshooting guide](https://ratify.dev/docs/troubleshoot/key-management-provider/kmp-tsg#cert_invalid). | ||
|
||
The recommended format for an error message in the Ratify log is as following. | ||
|
||
```text | ||
"<Error Code>: <Error Description>: <Error Reason>: <Remediation>" | ||
``` | ||
|
||
For the error messages displayed in `verifierReports`, it is recommended to add two new optional fields `errorReason` and `remediation`, which will be used when the field `isSuccess` is set to `false`: | ||
|
||
```text | ||
"verifierReports": [ | ||
{ | ||
"subject": "<Digest of the Artifact>" | ||
"isSuccess": false, | ||
"message": "<Error Description>", | ||
"errorReason": "<Error Reason>", | ||
"remediation": "<Remediation>" | ||
} | ||
] | ||
``` | ||
|
||
## Examples | ||
|
||
### Error messages displayed in the Ratify logs or returned by Ratify CLI commands | ||
|
||
For the above first example, the error message in the Ratify log can be improved to: | ||
|
||
```text | ||
REPOSITORY_OPERATION_FAILURE: Failed to resolve the artifact descriptor: HEAD "https://roacr.azurecr.io/v2/net-monitor/manifests/v2": GET "https://roacr.azurecr.io/oauth2/token? | ||
scope=repository%3Anet-monitor%3Apull&service=roacr.azurecr.io": response status code 401: unauthorized: | ||
authentication required, visit https://aka.ms/acr/authorization for more information. | ||
``` | ||
|
||
### Error messages displayed in `verifierReports` | ||
|
||
For the second example, the error message can be improved to: | ||
|
||
```text | ||
"verifierReports": [ | ||
{ | ||
"subject": "docker.io/library/hello-world@sha256:1408fec50309afee38f3535383f5b09419e6dc0925bc69891e79d84cc4cdce6", | ||
"isSuccess": false, | ||
"message": "NO_VERIFIER_REPORT: Failed to verify artifact docker.io/library/hello-world@sha256:1408fec50309afee38f3535383f5b09419e6dc0925bc69891e79d84cc4cdce6: | ||
"errorReason": "No signature is found or wrong configuration" | ||
"remediation": "Please either sign the artifact or configure verifiers for signature verification. Learn more at https://ratify.dev/docs/plugins/verifier/notation." | ||
} | ||
] | ||
``` | ||
|
||
> This link https://ratify.dev/docs/plugins/verifier/notation is used as an example to illustrate the improvements. The link should vary depending on the particular error encountered. | ||
|
||
## References | ||
|
||
- [Azure CLI Error Handling Guidelines](https://github.com/Azure/azure-cli/blob/dev/doc/error_handling_guidelines.md) | ||
- [ORAS CLI Error Handling and Message Guideline](https://github.com/oras-project/oras/blob/v1.2.0/docs/proposals/error-handling-guideline.md) |
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This example is also confusing. Why are they two HTTP requests (HEAD and GET) and how is this helping the user understand what the reason is (if this is meant to explain the reason)?
Also, having everything lowercase makes those messages really hard to read because it is not clear where a sentence ends and starts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@toddysm This message (HEAD and GET) was returned by ACR in this example. The ACR responded with an error and the response message was printed out. If we do not print out server response, we do not know what happened and the reason. In this case, the 401 unauthorized was also included in the message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Passing through errors is not a user-friendly practice. We need to catch the error from ACR and wrap it into something meaningful\ for the user of Rarify. The user of Ratify may have no knowledge of where the artifact is and even not know what artifact descriptor is. We need to provide meaningful message for the user of Ratyify and not the user of ACR.