[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3343?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17477462#comment-17477462
]
Volkan Yazici commented on LOG4J2-3343:
---------------------------------------
I am always a bit hesitant to add features that can be provided by the existing
feature set. This PR improves the following
{code:json}
{
"$resolver": "mdc",
"pattern": "(?i(?!x-spinnaker-groups))"
}
{code}
to
{code:json}
{
"$resolver": "mdc",
"excludePattern": "(?ix-spinnaker-groups)"
}
{code}
I don't see the improvement here – actually, the thing that needs to be typed
is even longer. Why don't we rather simply improve the documentation and show
people how they can use {{pattern}} to exclude?
> Add ability to use exclusion pattern filter on Map Resolver keys
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LOG4J2-3343
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3343
> Project: Log4j 2
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: JsonTemplateLayout
> Reporter: Matt Sicker
> Assignee: Matt Sicker
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 2.17.2
>
>
> Map Resolver currently supports specifying a pattern to filter for allowed
> keys in the map being resolved. I'd like a complementary feature to specify a
> pattern to filter for excluded keys from the map being resolved. It may also
> be beneficial to provide a similar option for excluded keys as full string
> matches rather than always using a pattern.
> For an example use case, suppose I copy request HTTP header names and values
> into the ThreadContext for every request. In Spinnaker microservices, this
> includes custom headers like {{X-Spinnaker-Groups}} which contains a list of
> groups the authenticated user belongs to which are filled in by the Fiat
> microservice (used for integrating authentication and authorization with
> various providers and providing a facade over Spring Security). If I want to
> exclude this header from being logged, I can currently set a negative
> lookahead pattern like {{(?i(?!x-spinnaker-groups))}} which works effectively
> the same, but how many developers like reading regex incantations like these?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
