Allow users to reset DAST submit field

assigned to @djadmin

added Category:DAST groupdynamic analysis workflowin review labels

changed milestone to %15.1

requested review from @atiwari71

@atiwari71 would you please review this change from the backend perspective? We'd start sending blank values for the submitField field in case the value is blank or user wants to reset it.

requested review from @arfedoro

Suggested Reviewers (beta)

The individuals below may be good candidates to participate in the review based on various factors.

You can use slash commands in comments to quickly assign /assign_reviewer @user1.

Suggested Reviewers
`@kushalpandya`, `@djadmin`, `@dpisek`, `@xanf`, `@egrieff`

If you do not believe these suggestions are useful, please apply the label Bad Suggested Reviewer. You can also provide feedback for this feature on this issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/357923.

Automatically generated by Suggested Reviewers Bot - an experimental ML-based recommendation engine created by ~"group::applied ml".

	1 Warning
	This merge request changed files with disabled eslint rules. Please consider fixing them.

Disabled eslint rules

The following files have disabled eslint rules. Please consider fixing them:

ee/app/assets/javascripts/security_configuration/dast_profiles/dast_site_profiles/components/dast_site_profile_form.vue

Run the following command for more details

node_modules/.bin/eslint --report-unused-disable-directives --no-inline-config \
  'ee/app/assets/javascripts/security_configuration/dast_profiles/dast_site_profiles/components/dast_site_profile_form.vue'

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
frontend	Zack Cuddy (`@zcuddy`) (UTC-5, 10.5 hours behind `@djadmin`)	Simon Knox (`@psimyn`) (UTC+10, 4.5 hours ahead of `@djadmin`)

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

Generated by Danger

Bundle size analysis [beta]

This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits eb683144 and b497c45e

Special assets

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
average	3.46 MB	3.46 MB	-	0.0 %
mainChunk	1.94 MB	1.94 MB	-	0.0 %

Note: We do not have exact data for eb683144. So we have used data from: 77d953a2.
The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
It might help to rerun the bundle-size-review job
This might mean that you have a few false positives in this report. If something unrelated to your code changes is reported, you can check this comparison in order to see if they caused this change.

Please look at the full report for more details

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

review-qa-blocking: test report for b497c45e

expand test summary

+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                          suites summary                           |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+--------+
|                      | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | result |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+--------+
| Plan                 | 41     | 0      | 1       | 41    | ❗     |
| Manage               | 34     | 0      | 2       | 35    | ❗     |
| Create               | 24     | 0      | 2       | 22    | ❗     |
| Verify               | 12     | 0      | 1       | 12    | ❗     |
| Package              | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | ➖     |
| Version sanity check | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | ➖     |
| Protect              | 2      | 0      | 0       | 2     | ❗     |
| Configure            | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | ➖     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+--------+
| Total                | 113    | 0      | 9       | 112   | ❗     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+--------+

approved this merge request

@arfedoro, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline has been started.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

Setting label(s) devopssecure sectionsec based on groupdynamic analysis.

added devopssecure sectionsec labels

added 203 commits

d8513437...eb683144 - 202 commits from branch master
b497c45e - Allow users to reset DAST submit field

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

approved this merge request

@psimyn would you maintainerize this please?

requested review from @psimyn

resolved all threads

approved this merge request

merged

@psimyn, did you forget to run a pipeline before you merged this work? Based on our code review process, if the latest pipeline finished more than 2 hours ago, you should:

Ensure the merge request is not in Draft status.
Start a pipeline (especially important for Community contribution merge requests).
Set the merge request to merge when pipeline succeeds.

(Improve this message?)