Is it possible to create a one time link in Laravel? Once you open the link it expires?
I have created a Temporary Signed Link, but I can open it multiple times. How do I counter it?
There is this package that can help you
https://github.com/linkeys-app/signed-url/
This will generate a link valid for 24hours and for just one click .
$link = \Linkeys\UrlSigner\Facade\UrlSigner::generate('https://www.example.com/invitation', ['foo' => 'bar'], '+24 hours', 1);
The first time the link is clicked, the route will work like normal. The second time, since the link only has a single click, an exception will be thrown. Of course, passing null instead of '+24 hours' to the expiry parameter will create links of an indefinite lifetime.
There maybe a package that provides a functionality like this... always worth looking on Packagelist before building something rather generic like this from scratch. But, it's also not a hard one to build from scratch.
First you'll need database persistence, so create a model and a migration called UniqueLink. In the migration you should include a string field called "slug", a string field called path, and a timestamp field called "used_at."
Next create a controller with a single __invoke(string $slug) method. In the method look up the $link = UniqueLink::where('slug', $slug)->first(); Update the models' used_at parameter like so $link->update(['used_at' => Carbon::now()]);
Then return a redirect()->to($link->path);
Add a route to your routes file like this Route::get('/unique-link/{slug}', UniqueLinkController::class);
Now you'll just need to create a method to add these links to the db which create a slug (you could use a UUID from Str::uuid() or come up with something more custom) and a path that the link should take someone. Over all a pretty straight forward functionality.
You could track when the URL is visited at least once and mark it as such for the user if you really want to, or you could reduce the expiry down to a few mins.
URL::temporarySignedRoute( 'foobar', now()->addMinutes(2), ['user' => 100] );
Related
Been struggling with how to do this the most optimized way possible...
I have two models: Catalog and Application.
Catalog has a field called name.
Application has a field called name.
Both have a relationship with each other.
I am struggling to find a way to create a function i could use across my Laravel application which i would pass application.id to it and it would return a $app->name value based on the following logic:
if $application->name exists, use this value as the $app->name for the $application object
otherwise, get the $catalog->name value and use it as the $app->name
Note that I would like to create a component #application() where i can simply pass the $application->id and build the display logic (theming/styling) into it.
Since i display this $app->name in many places, i would like to make it as lightweight as possible to avoid unnecessary queries.
I hope this makes sense! There are probably so many ways to go with it, i am lost at figuring out the way way to do this :(
I'm not completely sure to understand your model/DB design, but you could use a custom Helper to use that function through the whole app.
For that, you can create a simple PHP class Helper.php file in app/Http/Helpers folder or whatever location you want. Something like:
<?php
use App\Catalog;
use App\Application;
if (! function_exists('getAppName')) {
function getAppName($id){
// Do your logic here to return the name
$catalog = Catalog::find($id);
return $catalog->name;
}
}
?>
Then in any controller or view, you just do
getAppName($application->id)
Do no forget to add your helpers file to the composer autoload. So in composer.json in Laravel's root folder, add the helper path to the autoload array:
"files": [
"app/Http/Helpers/helpers.php"
],
Last but not least, run the following command:
composer dump-autoload
Please note that function logic is just for sample purposes since I don't know your model structure.
In my opinion, I care about the database cost.
Use ternary expression will be elegant. But it took two times IO costs from database if application name is empty.
$app_name = Application::find($id)->name;
$app_name = empty($app_name) ? Catalog::where('application_id', $id)->first()->name;
And this will more complicated, but the catalog_query only execute when application.name is empty, it execute in database and the result is taken out only once;
And Database will only find the name from one table or two table.
Something like this:
$catalog_query = Catalog::where('catalogs.application_id', $id)->select('catalogs.name')->groupBy('catalogs.name');
// if catalogs and applications relationship is 1:1, use ->limit(1) or remove groupBy('name') is better.
Application::where("applications.id", $id)
->selectRaw("IF(application.name IS NULL OR application.name = '', (" . $catalog_query->toSql() ."), applications.name ) AS app_name")
->mergeBindings($catalog_query->getQuery())
->first()
->app_name;
Hope this will help you.
My request looks like this
Array
(
[name] => Eugene A
[address] => Array
(
[billing] => Array
(
[address] => aaa
)
[shipping] => Array
(
[address] => bbb
)
)
)
I need to delete the shipping address. But how?
I can only delete both addresses,
$request->request->remove('address');
but I don't want it.
I want to delete only shipping address, like so
$request->request->remove('address.shipping');
But it is not working for me
Laravel 5.6
Update
Why do I need it?
Easy. I have abstracted out my Form Request validation into a class that is a child to Illuminate\Foundation\Http\FormRequest.
I actually have few classes for validation. I call them one by one in a controller like so:
app()->make(CustomerPostRequest::class); // validate Customer information
app()->make(AddressSaveRequest::class); // validate Addresses
Why?
Now I can Mock this requests in unit-tests, and I can have my validation abstracted out. And I can use Address validation in many places.
But Now I need more flexibility. Why?
Because AddressSaveRequest rule looks like this
public function rules(): array
{
return [
'address.*.address' => [
'bail',
'required',
'string',
],
...
It validates all addresses.
But sometimes I don't want to validate shipping address, if the the chech_box - ship_to_the_same_address is ticked.
But I have my Address validator abstracted in separate file and it is used in many places. There are places where ship_to_the_same_address tick box is not presented.
Thus I cannot use 'required_unless:ship_to_same_address,yes',
And I cannot use
app()->makeWith(AddressSaveRequest::class, ['ship_to_the_same_address ' => 'yes']);
Because Taylor said ...when calling makeWith. In my opinion it should make a new instance each time this method is called because the given parameter array is dynamic.. And it does, and it does not work correctly with app()->instance(AddressSaveRequest::class, $addressSaveRequest); and cannot be mocked in unit tests.
Why Taylor decided it - I seriously don't know.
PS
And yes, I know that mocking requests is not recommended.
If you were trying to add or remove inputs from the Request itself:
You can add data to the request pretty easily by merging it in and letting Laravel handle which data source is being used:
$request->merge(['input' => 'value']);
That will merge in the input named input into the input source for the Request.
For removing inputs you could try to replace all the inputs without that particular input in the replacement:
$request->replace($request->except('address.shipping'));
Just one idea to try.
Try this:
$request->except(['address.shipping']);
Details: Laravel Request
Laravel has a helper method called array_forget, which does exactly what it sounds like:
$requestArray = $request->all();
$newArray = array_forget($requestArray, 'address.shipping')
Documentation
After the edit to the main question with why some inputs of the request are to be deleted, my main answer isn't correct anymore. User Lagbox has the correct answer for the question that was asked.
However, I would like to note that another solution would be to have seperate Request classes with validation. One for placing an order (assuming it is a system where someone can order stuff) where ship_to_same_address is present and another one for things like updating your account, like PlaceOrderRequest and UpdateAccountRequest classes.
i have create module using module builder , now i am having a field called as book Name
now if i give same book name 2 time t is accepting .
i don't want to use and plug in for checking duplicate value because i want to learn the customization through code .
so i can call ajax and check in data base weather the same book name is exist in db or not but i don't know how controller works in sugar crm . and how to call ajax in sugar crm .
can any one guide me , your help is much appreciated .
If you really want to accomplish this using ajax then I'd recommend an entryPoint as the way to go. This customization will require a couple of simple things. First you'll write a little bit of javascript to perform the actual ajax call. That ajax call will post to the entryPoint you write. The entryPoint will run the query for you and return a response to you in the edit view. So lets get started by writing the entryPoint first.
First, open the file custom/include/MVC/Controller/entry_point_registry.php. If the folder structure and file do not exist yet, go ahead and create them.
Add the following code to the entry_point_registry.php file:
$entry_point_registry['test'] = array('file' => 'custom/test.php', 'auth' => true);
Some quick explanation about that line:
The index value of test can be changed to whatever you like. Perhaps 'unique_book_value' makes more sense in your case. You'll see how this value is used in a minute.
The file value in the array points to where you're gonna put your actual code. You should also give this a more meaningful name. It does NOT need to match the array key mentioned above.
The 'auth' => true part determines whether or not the browser needs to have an active logged in session with SugarCRM or not. In this case (and almost all) I'd suggest keeping this to true.
Now lets look at the code that will go in custom/test.php (or in your case unique_book_name.php):
/* disclaimer: we are not gonna get all crazy with using PDO and parameterized queries at this point,
but be aware that there is potential for sql injection here. The auth => true will help
mitigate that somewhat, but you're never supposed to trust any input, blah blah blah. */
global $db; // load the global sugarcrm database object for your query
$book_name = urldecode($_REQUEST['book_name']); // we are gonna start with $_REQUEST to make this easier to test, but consider changing to $_POST when confirmed working as expected
$book_id = urldecode($_REQUEST['book_id']); // need to make sure this still works as expected when editing an existing record
// the $db->quote is an alias for mysql_real_escape_string() It still does not protect you completely from sql injection, but is better than not using it...
$sql = "SELECT id FROM book_module_table_name WHERE deleted = 0 AND name = '".$db->quote($book_name)."' AND id <> '".$db->quote($book_id)."'";
$res = $db->query($sql);
if ($db->getRowCount($res) > 0) {
echo 'exists';
}
else {
echo 'unique';
}
A note about using direct database queries: There are api methods you can use to accomplish this. (hint: $bean->retrieve_by_string_fields() - check out this article if you wanna go that route: http://developer.sugarcrm.com/2012/03/23/howto-using-the-bean-instead-of-sql-all-the-time/) However, I find the api to be rather slow and ajax should be as fast as possible. If a client asked me to provide this functionality there's a 99% chance I'd use a direct db query. Might use PDO and parameterized query if I'm feeling fancy that day, but it's your call.
Using the above code you should be able to navigate to https://crm.yourdomain.com/index.php?entryPoint=test and run the code we just wrote.
However at this point all you're gonna get is a white screen. If you modify the url to include the entryPoint part and it loads your home page or does NOT go to a white screen there are 3 potential causes:
You put something different for $entry_point_registry['test']. If so change the url to read index.php?entryPoint=whatever_you_put_as_the_array_key
You have sugar in a folder or something on your domain so instead of crm.yourdomain.com it is located somewhere ugly and stupid like yourdomain.com/sugarcrm/ if this is the case just make sure that your are modifying the url such that the actual domain portion is preserved. Okay I'll spell it out for you... https://yourdomain.com/sugarcrm/index.php?entryPoint=test
This is more rare, but for some reason that I cannot figure out apache sometimes needs to be reloaded when adding a new entrypoint. If you have shell access a quick /etc/init.d/apache2 reload should do the trick. If you don't have shell access you may need to open a ticket with your hosting provider (or get a fricking vps where you have some control!!!, c'mon man!)
Still not working? Did you notice the "s" in https? Try http instead and buy a fricking $9 ssl cert, geez man!
Okay moving on. Let's test out the entryPoint a bit. Add a record to the book module. Let's add the book "War of Art" (no, not Art of War, although you should give that a read too).
Now in the url add this: index.php?entryPoint=test&book_name=Art%20of%20War
Oh gawd that url encoding is hideous right! Don't worry about it.
You should hopefully get an ugly white screen with the text "exists". If you do let's make sure it also works the other way. Add a 2 to the book name in the url and hopefully it will now say "unique".
Quick note: if you're using Sugar you're probably also using mysql which is case insensitive when searching on strings. If you really need case sensitivity check out this SO article:
How can I make SQL case sensitive string comparison on MySQL?
Okay so now we have our entryPoint working and we can move on to the fun part of making everything all ajaxical. There are a couple ways to go about this, but rather than going the most basic route I'm gonna show you what I've found to be the most reliable route.
You probably will need to create the following file: custom/modules/CUSTOM_BOOK_MODULE/views/view.edit.php (I hope by now I don't need to point out changing that path to use your module name...
Assuming this file did not exist and we are starting from scratch here is what it will need to look like:
if(!defined('sugarEntry') || !sugarEntry) die('Not A Valid Entry Point');
class CUSTOM_BOOK_MODULEViewEdit extends ViewEdit
{
public function display()
{
// make sure it works in the subpanel too
$this->useForSubpanel = true;
// make the name value available in the tpl file
$this->ss->assign('name_value', $this->bean->name);
// load the parsed contents of the tpl into this var
$name_input_code = $this->ss->fetch('custom/modules/CUSTOM_BOOK_MODULE/tpls/unique_book_checker.tpl.js');
// pass the parsed contents down into the editviewdefs
$this->ss->assign('custom_name_code', $name_input_code);
// definitely need to call the parent method
parent::display();
}
}
Things are looking good. Now we gotta write the code in this file: custom/modules/CUSTOM_BOOK_MODULE/tpls/unique_book_checker.tpl.js
First a couple of assumptions:
We're going to expect that this is Sugar 6.5+ and jquery is already available. If you're on an earlier version you'll need to manually include jquery.
We're going to put the event listener on the name field. If the book name value that you want to check is actually a different field name then simply adjust that in the javascript below.
Here is the code for custom/modules/CUSTOM_BOOK_MODULE/unique_book_checker.tpl.js:
<input type="text" name="name" id="name" maxlength="255" value="{$name_value}" />
<span id="book_unique_result"></span>
{literal}
<script type="text/javascript">
$(document).ready(function() {
$('#name').blur(function(){
$('#book_unique_result').html('<strong> checking name...</strong>');
$.post('index.php?entryPoint=test', {book_name: $('#name').val(), book_id: $('[name="record"]').val()}, function(data){
if (data == 'exists') {
removeFromValidate('EditView', 'name');
addToValidate('EditView', 'name', 'float', true, 'Book Name Must be Unique.');
$('#book_unique_result').html('<strong style="color:red;"> ✗</strong>');
}
else if (data == 'unique') {
removeFromValidate('EditView', 'name');
addToValidate('EditView', 'name', '', true, 'Name Required');
$('#book_unique_result').html('<strong style="color:green;"> ✓</strong>');
}
else {
// uh oh! maybe you have php display errors on?
}
});
});
});
</script>
{/literal}
Another Note: When the code detects that the name already exists we get a little hacky and use Sugar's built in validation stuff to prevent the record from saving. Basically, we are saying that if the name already exists then the name value MUST be a float. I figured this is pretty unlikely and will do the trick. However if you have a book named 3.14 or something like that and you try to create a duplicate this code will NOT prevent the save. It will tell you that a duplicate was found, but it will not prevent the save.
Phew! Okay last two steps and they are easy.
First, open the file: custom/modules/CUSTOM_BOOK_MODULE/metadata/editviewdefs.php.
Next, find the section that provides the metadata for the name field and add this customCode attribute so that it looks like this:
array (
'name' => 'name',
'customCode' => '{$custom_name_code}',
),
Finally, you'll need to do a quick repair and rebuild for the metadata changes to take effect. Go to Admin > Repair > Quick Repair & Rebuild.
Boom! You should be good to go!
I was just wondering what the best practice approach is for deciding where to create an action/view in certain situations.
If User hasMany Video
where is the best place to create the action/view to show user videos?
So within the Users account page 'My Videos' link do you
just create a users/my_videos action and view.
create videos/my_videos action and view.
or as is most likely you would already have a Controller/Action of videos/index which would have search functionality. Simply use this passing in a user id.
Any thoughts/advice greatly appreciated
Thanks
Leo
One potential option is to do the following:
Since the videos likely have much more code around them than a simple which user has which videos lookup the video list action should be in the VideosController.
In past projects I have (in CakePHP 1.3) used prefix routing to address some of this.
In config/core.php make sure you enable routing.prefixes to include a 'user' prefix.
<?php
... in routes.php ...
Routing.prefixes = array( 'user' );
?>
In the videos controller make an action with the following signature:
<?php
...
public function user_index( $userID = null ){
...
}
?>
and in the views where you link to the list of users videos the html::link call should look similar to the following:
<?php
...
echo $this->Html->link( 'User\'s Videos', array(
'controller' => 'videos',
'action' => 'index',
'prefix' => 'user',
$this->Session->read( 'Auth.User.id' )
));
?>
Of course this assumes you are using the Auth component here to track the logged in user. The Session helper code to read the authenticated user id might need tweaking.
This lets you a) Not worry too much about routing aside from enabling prefix routing and b) will quickly let you have pretty links like so -- site.com/user/videos/index/419
Couple this with some Slug love ( this is the best link for this I have seen - no slug field required on the db layer - http://42pixels.com/blog/slugs-ugly-bugs-pretty-urls )
You could even end up with urls like so quite easily: site.com/user/videos/index/eben-roux
and with just a tiny bit of editing to app/config/routes.php you could eliminate the /index/ portion and the results would be SEO friendly and user friendly in the format:
site.com/user/videos/eben-roux
http://book.cakephp.org/view/945/Routes-Configuration
As always with code you have the two extremes of:
1) Putting everything in a single controller
2) Having every action in a separate controller
The ideal approach will nearly always be somewhere between the two so how to decide what is grouped together and what is separated?
In MVC I tend to look at the Views and see what the commonalities are: as you point out Users have a ref to a collection of Videos in the Model, but would you want both sets of Data in any single View? i.e. In this example is it likely that you would be on a page that both managed user details, and displayed the list of vids? If not then I'd suggest separate controllers.
If either controller would then be extremely simple - e.g. one method, then may be worth considering merging the two.
I like to keeps things separate.
What I'd do is an index action in videos controller, passing user's id as argument and then displaying only current users video.
public function index($id = null){
$this->paginate = array( 'conditions'=> array('Video.user_id' => $id));
$this->set('videos', $this->paginate());
}
My take is that it depends on the responsibility you assign to the controllers.
I would say that something like a User or a Video controller should be concerned with only those entities.
You may want to consider something like a UserDashboard (or something similar but appropriately named) as alluded to by Dunhamzzz in the comments. This can aggegate all the functionality from an "entry" point-of-view. The same way a banner / shortcut / action menu would work.
Your UserDashboard would use whatever data layer / repository is required to get the relevant data (such as the IVideoRepository or IVideoQuery implementation).
Usually when something doesn't feel right it isn't. Try splitting it out and see how it works. You can alsways re-arrange / refactor again later.
Just a thought.
I don't think there's a 'one-rule-fits-all' solution to this question, but I would try to take an approach in which you would determine what the main object is that you're dealing with, and adding the action/view to that object's controller.
In your example I'd say that your main object is a video and that the action you're requiring is a list of video's filtered by a specific property (in this case the user's id, but this could very well be a category, a location, etc.).
One thing I would not do is let your desired URL determine in which controller you put your functionality. URLs are trivially changed with routes.
So, I'm not quite sure how I should structure this in CakePHP to work correctly in the proper MVC form.
Let's, for argument sake, say I have the following data structure which are related in various ways:
Team
Task
Equipment
This is generally how sites are and is quite easy to structure and make in Cake. For example, I would have the a model, controller and view for each item set.
My problem (and I'm sure countless others have had it and already solved it) is that I have a level above the item sets. So, for example:
Department
Team
Task
Equipment
Department
Team
Task
Equipment
Department
Team
Task
Equipment
In my site, I need the ability for someone to view the site at an individual group level as well as move to view it all together (ie, ignore the groups).
So, I have models, views and controls for Depart, Team, Task and Equipment.
How do I structure my site so that from the Department view, someone can select a Department then move around the site to the different views for Team/Task/Equipment showing only those that belong to that particular Department.
In this same format, is there a way to also move around ignoring the department associations?
Hopefully the following example URLs clarifies anything that was unclear:
// View items while disregarding which group-set record they belong to
http://www.example.com/Team/action/id
http://www.example.com/Task/action/id
http://www.example.com/Equipment/action/id
http://www.example.com/Departments
// View items as if only those associated with the selected group-set record exist
http://www.example.com/Department/HR/Team/action/id
http://www.example.com/Department/HR/Task/action/id
http://www.example.com/Department/HR/Equipment/action/id
Can I get the controllers to function in this manner? Is there someone to read so I can figure this out?
Thanks to those that read all this :)
I think I know what you're trying to do. Correct me if I'm wrong:
I built a project manager for myself in which I wanted the URLs to be more logical, so instead of using something like
http://domain.com/project/milestones/add/MyProjectName I could use
http://domain.com/project/MyProjectName/milestones/add
I added a custom route to the end (!important) of my routes so that it catches anything that's not already a route and treats it as a "variable route".
Router::connect('/project/:project/:controller/:action/*', array(), array('project' => '[a-zA-Z0-9\-]+'));
Whatever route you put means that you can't already (or ever) have a controller by that name, for that reason I consider it a good practice to use a singular word instead of a plural. (I have a Projects Controller, so I use "project" to avoid conflicting with it.)
Now, to access the :project parameter anywhere in my app, I use this function in my AppController:
function __currentProject(){
// Finding the current Project's Info
if(isset($this->params['project'])){
App::import('Model', 'Project');
$projectNames = new Project;
$projectNames->contain();
$projectInfo = $projectNames->find('first', array('conditions' => array('Project.slug' => $this->params['project'])));
$project_id = $projectInfo['Project']['id'];
$this->set('project_name_for_layout', $projectInfo['Project']['name']);
return $project_id;
}
}
And I utilize it in my other controllers:
function overview(){
$this->layout = 'project';
// Getting currentProject id from App Controller
$project_id = parent::__currentProject();
// Finding out what time it is and performing queries based on time.
$nowStamp = time();
$nowDate = date('Y-m-d H:i:s' , $nowStamp);
$twoWeeksFromNow = $nowDate + 1209600;
$lateMilestones = $this->Project->Milestone->find('all', array('conditions'=>array('Milestone.project_id' => $project_id, 'Milestone.complete'=> 0, 'Milestone.duedate <'=> $nowDate)));
$this->set(compact('lateMilestones'));
$currentProject = $this->Project->find('all', array('conditions'=>array('Project.slug' => $this->params['project'])));
$this->set(compact('currentProject'));
}
For your project you can try using a route like this at the end of your routes.php file:
Router::connect('/:groupname/:controller/:action/*', array(), array('groupname' => '[a-zA-Z0-9\-]+'));
// Notice I removed "/project" from the beginning. If you put the :groupname first, as I've done in the last example, then you only have one option for these custom url routes.
Then modify the other code to your needs.
If this is a public site, you may want to consider using named variables. This will allow you to define the group on the URL still, but without additional functionality requirements.
http://example.com/team/group:hr
http://example.com/team/action/group:hr/other:var
It may require custom routes too... but it should do the job.
http://book.cakephp.org/view/541/Named-parameters
http://book.cakephp.org/view/542/Defining-Routes
SESSIONS
Since web is stateless, you will need to use sessions (or cookies). The question you will need to ask yourself is how to reflect the selection (or not) of a specific department. It could be as simple as putting a drop down selection in the upper right that reflects ALL, HR, Sales, etc. When the drop down changes, it will set (or clear) the Group session variable.
As for the functionality in the controllers, you just check for the Session. If it is there, you limit the data by the select group. So you would use the same URLs, but the controller or model would manage how the data gets displayed.
// for all functionality use:
http://www.example.com/Team/action/id
http://www.example.com/Task/action/id
http://www.example.com/Equipment/action/id
You don't change the URL to accommodate for the functionality. That would be like using a different URL for every USER wanting to see their ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER, or BILLING INFO. Where USER would be the group and ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER< and BILLING INFO would be the item sets.
WITHOUT SESSIONS
The other option would be to put the Group filter on each page. So for example on Team/index view you would have a group drop down to filter the data. It would accomplish the same thing without having to set and clear session variables.
The conclusion is and the key thing to remember is that the functionality does not change nor does the URLs. The only thing that changes is that you will be working with filtered data sets.
Does that make sense?