feat: require environmentSubdomain or an explicit useLegacyDomain opt-out - #649
feat: require environmentSubdomain or an explicit useLegacyDomain opt-out#649armando-rodriguez-cko wants to merge 8 commits into
Conversation
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 19 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
🟠 Advisory review: Concerns worth a lookThis PR needs a human approval. Before you give it, these are the things I'd want resolved. This PR makes environmentSubdomain mandatory for Default/DefaultOAuth platforms (or requires explicit useLegacyDomain() opt-out), and makes invalid subdomains throw rather than silently fall back. The logic is sound but there is one concrete correctness issue and one operationally significant inconsistency worth resolving before merge. Concerns
This is not an approval. wall-e cannot auto-approve this PR — it is an opinion to help whoever does. Advisory review · us.anthropic.claude-sonnet-4-6 · wall-e 2026.06.19-02 |
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| final CheckoutApi checkoutApi = new CheckoutSdkBuilder().staticKeys() | ||
| .publicKey(VALID_DEFAULT_PK) | ||
| .secretKey(VALID_DEFAULT_SK) | ||
| .environment(Environment.SANDBOX) | ||
| .useLegacyDomain() |
| () -> new CheckoutSdkBuilder().staticKeys() | ||
| .publicKey(VALID_DEFAULT_PK) | ||
| .secretKey(VALID_DEFAULT_SK) | ||
| .environment(Environment.SANDBOX) | ||
| .environmentSubdomain("1234doma") | ||
| .useLegacyDomain() |
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 19 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 19 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 22 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 21 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 17 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
| @@ -136,6 +141,9 @@ void shouldInstantiateCheckoutApiWithOAuth_customAuthorizeUrl() throws URISyntax | |||
| System.getenv("CHECKOUT_DEFAULT_OAUTH_CLIENT_SECRET")) | |||
| .scopes(OAuthScope.GATEWAY) | |||
| .environment(Environment.SANDBOX) | |||
| // The sandbox OAuth clients are not provisioned for the merchant-specific subdomain, so | |||
| // the token request would come back invalid_client. Opting out explicitly until they are. | |||
| .useLegacyDomain() | |||
| .build(); | |||
|
|
|||
| @@ -77,6 +80,9 @@ public SandboxTestFixture(final PlatformType platformType) { | |||
| .secretKey(requireNonNull(System.getenv("CHECKOUT_DEFAULT_SECRET_KEY"))) | |||
| .environment(Environment.SANDBOX) | |||
| .executor(CUSTOM_EXECUTOR) | |||
| @@ -93,8 +99,11 @@ public SandboxTestFixture(final PlatformType platformType) { | |||
| OAuthScope.FORWARD_SECRETS, OAuthScope.PAYMENTS_SEARCH) | |||
| .environment(Environment.SANDBOX) | |||
| .executor(CUSTOM_EXECUTOR) | |||
| // The sandbox OAuth clients are not provisioned for the merchant-specific subdomain, so | |||
| // the token request would come back invalid_client. Opting out explicitly until they are. | |||
…-out The merchant-specific subdomain is how merchants should reach the API, but it was optional and an unset value silently fell back to api.checkout.com, so a forgotten subdomain looked exactly like a deliberate opt-out and the SDK could not warn about either. Callers must now choose: set environmentSubdomain, or call the already-deprecated useLegacyDomain(). Both, or neither, throws. An invalid subdomain now throws instead of being quietly ignored, which is a second breaking change: callers passing a malformed value are currently served by the shared host and never find out. environmentSubdomain no longer needs environment() to be set first, since the EnvironmentSubdomain is now built when the configuration is assembled. The Previous (ABC) platform predates merchant-specific subdomains and stays exempt via requiresEnvironmentSubdomain(). Mirrors checkout-sdk-net#590. Refs INT-1688.
…tion
Seven integration fixtures build their own clients outside SandboxTestFixture
(OAuth, Issuing, Accounts, Accounts payout schedules, APM previews, card
metadata), so the mandatory subdomain would have failed them at construction.
They now share TestDomainConfiguration.configureDomain, which uses the shared
hosts. Applying the merchant-specific subdomain instead looked better, since it
is the path merchants are being moved to, but the sandbox OAuth clients are not
provisioned for it: .NET CI failed 224 integration tests with invalid_client
when the token request went to {subdomain}.access.sandbox.checkout.com. The
reason is recorded on the class so nobody repeats the experiment.
…onfiguration CI runs the full suite, so three OAuthTestIT cases that build their own client were still failing at construction. Local runs excluded integration tests, which is why they were missed.
Flagged in review, and fair: a bulk edit added the subdomain to the Previous (ABC) builder, the one platform that is exempt from needing one. That made the test misleading and, worse, removed the only coverage of the exemption actually working. It builds without a subdomain again.
The suite could only run against the shared hosts, so the subdomain path this PR makes mandatory had no integration coverage. Reviewers flagged that on every SDK, and it is the right thing to flag. The domain helper now has two modes. Default is unchanged, the shared hosts, because the sandbox OAuth clients are not provisioned for the subdomain and the token request returns invalid_client. Set CHECKOUT_TEST_USE_SUBDOMAIN=true and the suite runs against CHECKOUT_MERCHANT_SUBDOMAIN instead, so once sandbox is provisioned like production it is a one-line change in the workflows, already wired and documented, rather than a rewrite of every fixture. The switch is deliberately separate from CHECKOUT_MERCHANT_SUBDOMAIN, which CI already exports: provisioning should drive the behaviour, not the presence of a secret.
Versions are bumped on master during the release, not in a feature branch, per the release workflow. This branch should carry only the change itself; the major bump is classified and applied when the release is cut.
Two problems with the previous approach. It needed a new variable in 21 workflow files, which is not viable without access to create secrets. And it wrapped the builder chain in a configureDomain helper that is not part of the public API, so the tests stopped looking like the code a merchant would actually write. Every fixture now calls the real opt-out inline, in the chain, with a comment saying why: the sandbox OAuth clients are not provisioned for the merchant-specific subdomain, so the token request comes back invalid_client. When sandbox is provisioned, those calls become the subdomain setter. The unit tests covering all four combinations are untouched: they already used the public API directly.
b136f1e to
163db6e
Compare
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 18 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
| @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ | |||
| group=com.checkout | |||
| version=7.16.2 | |||
| version=7.15.0 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What? should not this be 7.17.0?
🔴 Risk Classification: MAJORApproval route: AI Review + Human Approval Required Classification reasons
Operational gates
Files analysed: 17 wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · policy |
🔬 Debug — why this classification?Each reason code emitted by the classifier, its source clause in the AI in SDLC Control Framework, and what it means.
Kinds:
See issue #3 for the proposal to formalise this map as Appendix A of the standards doc. wall-e 2026.06.19-02 · debug |
|
3 participants
Summary
Makes the merchant-specific subdomain (MSSD) mandatory. Callers must now call
environmentSubdomain(...), or explicitly opt out with the new, already-@DeprecateduseLegacyDomain(). Setting both, or neither, throwsCheckoutArgumentExceptionat client construction. MSSD is no longer beta and non-MSSD usage will be deprecated, so the previous silent fallback toapi.checkout.comhad to go.Changes
AbstractCheckoutSdkBuilder— the subdomain is held as aStringand theEnvironmentSubdomainis built when the configuration is assembled, soenvironmentSubdomain()no longer has to be called afterenvironment(); newuseLegacyDomain()marked@Deprecated; newvalidateEnvironmentSettings(); newrequiresEnvironmentSubdomain()EnvironmentSubdomain—createUrlWithSubdomainthrows on an invalid subdomain instead of returning the URL unchangedCheckoutPreviousSdkBuilder— Previous/ABC exempted viarequiresEnvironmentSubdomain()CheckoutSdkBuilderTest— covers all four combinations (subdomain only, legacy only, both, neither), an invalid subdomain, and the Previous exemptionDefaultCheckoutConfigurationTest— the parameterised bad-subdomain case now asserts the throw instead of the silent fallbackTestDomainConfiguration(new) +SandboxTestFixtureand seven integration fixtures — every client the suite builds now chooses a domainFixed along the way
environmentSubdomain()used to build the URLs from whateverenvironmentwas set at call time, so calling it beforeenvironment()silently produced the wrong host.API Reference
Breaking changes
Yes, two. This needs a major release, classified and versioned when the release is cut.
api.checkout.com/access.checkout.comnow fails at client construction. Migration: set the subdomain, or use the legacy-domain opt-out as a temporary measure. The Previous (ABC) platform is unaffected.README
Updated in this PR: a "Subdomain value" section above the Default example, the subdomain added to the configuration samples, and a "Legacy domain (emergency use only)" section at the bottom.
Notes
The suite routes every client it builds through a single helper that uses the shared hosts. Applying the merchant-specific subdomain there looked better, since it is the path merchants are being moved to, but the sandbox OAuth clients are not provisioned for it: .NET CI failed 224 integration tests with
invalid_clientwhen the token request went to{subdomain}.access.sandbox.checkout.com. Binding those OAuth clients to the subdomain is a platform task and should land before merchants are told the subdomain is mandatory.Reference implementation: checkout-sdk-net#590. Tracked as INT-1688.
No version bump here: that happens on master when the release is cut, per the release workflow.