I am attempting to use the Create Contacts endpoint for Microsoft Graph API (Doc is here: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/graph/api/user-post-contacts?view=graph-rest-1.0&tabs=http) to register new contact for my user. I created body as described in API documentation but getting the error below:
{
"error": {
"code": "Request_BadRequest",
"message": "A value without a type name was found and no expected type is available. When the model is specified, each value in the payload must have a type which can be either specified in the payload, explicitly by the caller or implicitly inferred from the parent value.",
"innerError": {
"request-id": "daf78520-50e6-444b-97a2-779762b3e6ed",
"date": "2020-01-23T14:20:18"
}
}
}
Requests used:
1. POST https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/{{tenant_id}}/contacts;
2. POST https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/me/contacts;
Request body example:
{
"givenName": "Yulia",
"surname": "Lukianenko",
"emailAddresses": [
{
"address": "yulia#lukianenko.onmicrosoft.com",
"name": "Yulia Lukianenko"
}
],
"businessPhones": [
"+1 732 555 0102"
]
}
Did somebody meet such kind of issue? How you resolved it?
Thank you in advance for your help!
POST request is incorrect here.
It should be :
https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/me/contacts
Also you need to make sure "Contacts.ReadWrite" permission is granted to the app registered in AAD.
P.S: I used the same JSON in your example using graphExplorer and contact was created successfully.
Related
I am trying to create a calendar event with extended data using Microsoft Graph API.(actually, I am trying to converting the existing open extension to schema extension since I couldn't filter the non-id extended value of the open extension.)
Before my try, I have already created my schema extension successfully and creating a calendar event with the schema extension responses an error code "BadRequest" and message "Requests must contain extension changes exclusively".
I tried to do this by following the doc.
POST https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/me/calendars/{calendar-group-id}/events
{
"subject": "schema extension test",
"body": {
"contentType": "HTML",
"content": "schema extension test"
},
"start": {
"dateTime": "2021-01-22T12:00:00",
"timeZone": "Eastern Standard Time"
},
"end": {
"dateTime": "2021-01-23T14:00:00",
"timeZone": "Eastern Standard Time"
},
"attendees": [],
"extendedData": {
"courseId": "11",
"materialId": "22",
"courseType": "video"
}
}
response:
{
"error": {
"code": "BadRequest",
"message": "Requests must contain extension changes exclusively.",
"innerError": {
...
}
}
}
Without extendedData, creating the event responses success, and after creating the event, if I patch the event with only extendedData, it responses an error "A type named 'Microsoft.OutlookServices.OpenTypeExtension' could not be resolved by the model. When a model is available, each type name must resolve to a valid type".
PATCH https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/me/calendars/{calendar-group-id}/events/{event-id}
{
"extendedData": {
"courseId": "11",
"materialId": "22",
"courseType": "video"
}
}
response:
{
"error": {
"code": "RequestBodyRead",
"message": "A type named 'Microsoft.OutlookServices.OpenTypeExtension' could not be resolved by the model. When a model is available, each type name must resolve to a valid type.",
"innerError": {
...
}
}
}
I was able to succeed when I used Graph API explorer with signed in user by consent Calendars.Read permission.
But if I try the same thing in postman, it doesn't work.
I already have granted all calendar permissions including delegated and application permissions in Azure.
This is because your schema extension name is not extendedData.
When you use POST https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/schemaExtensions to create an extension for Event type, the real name will be prefixed.
Like this:
And based on this known issue of Microsoft Graph:
You cannot specify a schema extension in the same operation as
creating an instance of contact, event, message, or post. You must
first create the resource instance and then do a PATCH to that
instance to add a schema extension and custom data.
So we need to create the event first and then update it.
When updating the event, we need to specify the real extension name:
I have followed the below stackoverflow link ( The answer provided by Allen Wu)
How to add a custom claim and retrieve the same as part of access_token, when the scope is not Graph API in Azure AD?
to add a custom claim in access token. But I am getting an error when I am trying to
Assign the claimsMappingPolicy to a servicePrincipal.
I have opened microsoft graph and executed a POST call like so -
https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/servicePrincipals/8b6e2827-b3fa-467b-940d-324c301ca606/claimsMappingPolicies/$ref
with the request body
{
"#odata.id":"https://graph.microsoft.com/v1.0/policies/claimsMappingPolicies/fce7f260-9598-426d-b8c2-7e589b25415b"
}
but I am getting a 409 Response code with the following response preview :
{
"error": {
"code": "Request_MultipleObjectsWithSameKeyValue",
"message": "Request contains property changes that would result in property-uniqueness violation(s). Please retry your request with corrected values.",
"innerError": {
"date": "2020-10-18T06:32:23",
"request-id": "ae69cb4f-716d-4d56-a123-572c76ace2e0",
"client-request-id": "29b0130e-8b7a-d09d-1188-2856c99dad8e"
}
}
}
It means the servicePrincipal has been assigned a claimsMappingPolicy.
If you assign another claimsMappingPolicy to it, you will get the 409 Conflict error.
You need to List assigned claimsMappingPolicy first and then Remove claimsMappingPolicy.
Now you can assign claimsMappingPolicy to the servicePrincipal.
My application was designed to add a user to my Azure AD B2C using Azure AD Graph API. I also handled the case where I'd be calling the add user graph API with an email ID that already exists in AD. I was looking for the error message in the response body to handle this. Has there been any change w.r.t the response message?
POST
https://graph.windows.net/{tenant}/users?api-version=1.6
Request Body :
{
"accountEnabled": true,
"signInNames": [
{
"type": "EmailAddress",
"value": "TestGraphApiCreatedUser#TestGraphApiCreatedUser.com"
}],
"displayName": "TestGraphApiCreatedUser",
"mailNickname": "TestGraphApiCreatedUser",
"passwordProfile" : {
"forceChangePasswordNextLogin": false,
"password": "vhkjds#fceu456VCHU"
},
"creationType": "LocalAccount",
"passwordPolicies": "DisablePasswordExpiration"
}
If a user already exists with the given email address, the error I was getting earlier was
{
"odata.error": {
"code": "Request_BadRequest",
"message": {
"lang": "en",
"value": "Another object with the same value for property signInName already exists."
}
}
}
Now, for the same flow, I'm getting below error :
{
"odata.error": {
"code": "Request_BadRequest",
"message": {
"lang": "en",
"value": "Another object with the same value for property userPrincipalName already exists."
}
}
}
Is there any difference between the two error messages. Since there isn't any error code, I had hard coded the whole error message. Now that there is a slight change in the message, I've to update my code. How can I handle this in a better way?
I didn't check to confirm if they changed the error message, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if they did. The userPrincipalName may be coming from the underlying AAD, maybe MS changed the B2C implementation and now it exposes an error message from there?
In your particular case, a better option may be to check if the email address exists in B2C just before calling the API to create the new user. It's an extra API call, but it shouldn't matter much unless you're creating many users at a time, e.g. in a batch. You'll still have to handle the user creation call failure, but if it happens you could just return a generic error message.
I am trying to create a "LocalAccount" in a B2C domain via the Azure AD Graph API.
To do this I registered an app (via Azure Active Directory -> App registrations (legacy)) and add all permissions for "Windows Azure Active Directory".
The request to create the user is
add_user_json = {
"accountEnabled": True,
"creationType": "LocalAccount",
"signInNames": [{
"type": "emailAddress",
"value": "test#email.com"
},
{
"type": "emailAddress",
"value": "test2#email.com"
}],
"displayName": user_id,
"mailNickname": user_id,
"passwordProfile": {
"password": "aPassword",
"forceChangePasswordNextLogin": "true"
},
"passwordPolicies": "DisablePasswordExpiration"
}
and the endpoint "https://graph.windows.net/{tenant}.onmicrosoft.com/users?api-version=1.6" (I tried "https://graph.windows.net/myorganization/users?api-version=1.6", too).
The error I get is "One or more properties contains invalid values."
Furthermore, if I create a new user via the sign up flow it is possible to create a local account.
Does anybody have an idea what I did wrong?
The "One or more properties contains invalid values." error is occurring because a user object can't have more than one signInName entry of the same type.
There's a really good utility here with the code to help you.
Look at the create example there
One obvious one is:
"forceChangePasswordNextLogin": "true"
This needs to be "false".
I’m currently implementing the new firebase auth() in my angularjs app with username and password.
firebase.auth().signInWithEmailAndPassword(email, password)
This is all working, until an incorrect password is supplied for a valid email address. The promise returns and I handle the event gracefully. However the console and network logs a 400
POST https://www.googleapis.com/identitytoolkit/v3/relyingparty/verifyPassword?key=[key] 400
The response body:
{
"error": {
"errors": [
{
"domain": "global",
"reason": "invalid",
"message": "INVALID_PASSWORD"
}
],
"code": 400,
"message": "INVALID_PASSWORD"
}
}
I have seen all the previous questions on this and I can't find a response that will satisfy my app needs. Intended behaviour is to return an error response to the promise(which is what is does) but not also log to the user which piece of information is incorrect.
From a penetration test perspective this gives away valuable information to a user/hacker. Are there any other suggestions on how to handle this other than changing to another auth implementation?
Any help much appreciated.