Dynamic POJO validation based on groups in spring - java

Consider the following pojo for reference:
public class User{
private String username;
private String firstName;
private String middleName;
private String lastName;
private String phone;
//getters and setters
}
My application is a basically spring-boot based REST API which exposes two endpoints, one to create the user and the other to retrieve a user.
The "users" fall into certain categories, group-a, group-b etc. which I get from the headers of the post request.
I need to validated the user data in runtime and the validations may differ based on the group of a user.
for example, the users that fall into group-a may have phone numbers as an optional field whereas it might be a mandatory field for some other group.
The regex may also vary based on their groups.
I need to be able to configure spring, to somehow dynamically validate my pojo as soon as they are created and their respective set of validations get triggered based on their groups.
Maybe I can create a yml/xml configuration which would allow me to enable this?
I would prefer to not annotate my private String phone with #NotNull and #Pattern.
My configuration is as follows:
public class NotNullValidator implements Validator {
private String group;
private Object target;
public String getGroup() {
return group;
}
public void setGroup(String group) {
this.group = group;
}
public Object getTarget() {
return target;
}
public void setTarget(Object target) {
this.target = target;
}
#Override
public void validate(Object o) {
if (Objects.nonNull(o)) {
throw new RuntimeException("Target is null");
}
}
}
public interface Validator {
void validate(Object o);
}
#ConfigurationProperties(prefix = "not-null")
#Component
public class NotNullValidators {
List<NotNullValidator> validators;
public List<NotNullValidator> getValidators() {
return validators;
}
public void setValidators(List<NotNullValidator> validators) {
this.validators = validators;
}
}
application.yml
not-null:
validators:
-
group: group-a
target: user.username
-
group: group-b
target: user.phone
I want to configure my application to somehow allow the validators to pick their targets (the actual objects, not the strings mentioned in the yml), and invoke their respective public void validate(Object o) on their targets.
P.S.
Please feel free to edit the question to make it better.
I am using jackson for serializing and deserializing JSON.

The easiest solution to your problem, as i see it, is not with Spring or the POJOs themselves but with a design pattern.
The problem you're describing is easily solved by a strategy pattern solution.
You match the strategy to use by the header you're expecting in the request, that describes the type of user, and then you perform said validations inside the strategy itself.
This will allow you to use the same POJO for the whole approach, and deal with the specifics of handling/parsing and validating data according to the each type of user's strategy.
Here's a link from wiki books with a detailed explanation of the pattern
Strategy Pattern
Suppose you have a basic interface for your strategies:
interface Strategy {
boolean validate(User user);
}
And you have 2 different implementations for the 2 different types of user:
public class StrategyA implements Strategy {
public boolean validate(User user){
return user.getUsername().isEmpty();
}
}
public class StrategyB implements Strategy {
public boolean validate(User user){
return user.getPhone().isEmpty();
}
}
You add a Strategy attribute to your User POJO and assign the right implementation of the Strategy to that attribute when you receive the post request.
Everytime you need to validate data for that user you just have to invoke the validate method of the assigned strategy.
If each User can fit multiple strategies, you can add a List<Strategy> as an attribute instead of a single one.
If you don't want to change the POJO you have to check which is the correct strategy every time you receive a post request.
Besides the validate method you can add methods to handle data, specific to each strategy.
Hope this helps.

You can use validation groups to control which type of user which field gets validated for. For example:
#NotBlank(groups = {GroupB.class})
private String phone;
#NotBlank(groups = {GroupA.class, GroupB.class})
private String username;
Then you use the headers from the request that you mentioned to decide which group to validate against.
See http://blog.codeleak.pl/2014/08/validation-groups-in-spring-mvc.html?m=1 for a complete example.
Updated to include a more comprehensive example:
public class Val {
private Validator validator = Validation.buildDefaultValidatorFactory().getValidator();
public boolean isValid(User user, String userType) {
usergroups userGroup = usergroups.valueOf(userType);
Set<ConstraintViolation<User>> constraintViolations = validator.validate(user, userGroup.getValidationClass());
return constraintViolations.isEmpty();
}
public interface GroupA {}
public interface GroupB {}
public enum usergroups {
a(GroupA.class),
b(GroupB.class);
private final Class clazz;
usergroups(Class clazz) {
this.clazz = clazz;
}
public Class getValidationClass() {
return clazz;
}
}
}
This doesn't use application.yaml, instead the mapping of which fields are validated for each group is set in annotations, similar results using Spring's built in validation support.

I was able to solve my problem with the use of Jayway JsonPath.
My solution goes as follows:
Add a filter to your API which has the capability to cache the InputStream of the ServletRequest since it can be read only once. To achieve this, follow this link.
Create a bunch of validators and configure them in your application.yml file with the help of #ConfigurationProperties. To achieve this, follow this link
Create a wrapper which would contain all your validators as a list and initialize it with #ConfigurationProperties and the following configuration:
validators:
regexValidators:
-
target: $.userProfile.lastName
pattern: '[A-Za-z]{0,12}'
group: group-b
minMaxValidators:
-
target: $.userProfile.age
min: 18
max: 50
group: group-b
Call the validate method in this wrapper with the group which comes in the header, and then call the validate of the individual validators. To achieve this, I wrote the following piece of code in my wrapper:
public void validate(String input, String group) {
regexValidators.stream()
.filter(validator -> group.equals(validator.getGroup()))
.forEach(validator -> validator.validate(input));
minMaxValidators.stream()
.filter(validator -> group.equals(validator.getGroup()))
.forEach(validator -> validator.validate(input));
}
and the following method in my validator:
public void validate(String input) {
String data = JsonPath.parse(input).read(target);
if (data == null) {
throw new ValidationException("Target: " + target + " is NULL");
}
Matcher matcher = rule.matcher(data);
if (!matcher.matches()) {
throw new ValidationException("Target: " + target + " does not match the pattern: " + pattern);
}
}
I have created a functioning project to demonstrate the validations and it can be found here.
I understand that the answer alone might not be very clear, please follow the above mentioned url for the complete source code.

Related

Spring Boot - how to validate fields that depend on each other?

Is there some way in Spring Boot that I can perform validation on properties that depend on each other's values, and have the error message be associated with the property?
I want to return the errors to the user in a nice JSON structure:
{
"errors": {
"name": "is required if flag is true"
}
}
Example:
#Entity
public class MyEntity {
private boolean nameRequiredFlag;
// Required if "nameRequiredFlag" is set to true:
private String name;
}
One solution that doesn't solve my problem of associating the error message with the name property is to create a validator annotation for the entity:
#ValidEntity
public class MyEntity {
private boolean nameRequiredFlag;
// Required if "nameRequiredFlag" is set to true:
private String name;
}
#Constraint( validatedBy = { MyEntityValidator.class } )
#Documented
#Target( { ElementType.TYPE } )
#Retention( RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME )
public #interface ValidEntity{
Class<?>[] groups () default {};
String message () default "name is required if 'nameRequiredFlag' is true";
Class<? extends Payload>[] payload () default {};
}
public class MyEntityValidator implements Validator<ValidEntity, MyEntity> {
#Override
public boolean isValid ( MyEntity entity, ConstraintValidatorContext context ) {
if ( !entity.nameRequiredFlag ) return true;
return !StringUtils.isBlank( entity.getName() );
}
}
This is laughably cumbersome and doesn't solve my problem. Isn't there any way I can do this with the framework validation?
Edit: This is for a JSON API, and the consumer really needs to be able to associate the error message to a best guess at which field has an issue. It is not helpful to send the consumer an error message for the whole object, or a computed property.
Solution given by #EvicKhaosKat is one way of doing it. However, when there are too many fields dependent on each other in a complicated way, your class becomes full of annotations and I personally struggle a lot relating them.
A simpler approach is to create a method(s) in your pojo which does the cross field validations and returns a boolean. On the top of this method annotate it with #AssertTrue(message = "your message"). It will solve your problem in a cleaner fashion.
public class SampleClass {
private String duration;
private String week;
private String month;
#AssertTrue(message = "Duration and time attributes are not properly populated")
public boolean isDurationCorrect() {
if (this.duration.equalsIgnoreCase("month")) {
if (Arrays.asList("jan", "feb", "mar").contains(month))
return true;
}
if (this.duration.equalsIgnoreCase("week")) {
if (Arrays.asList("1-7", "8-15", "16-24", "25-31").contains(week))
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
Note: I have not tested this code but have used this approach in multiple places and it works.
Possible reason is that name validation operates on not-yet-fully constructed object, so nameRequiredFlag is not filled yet.
As an option there is a #GroupSequence annotation, which allows to group and perform validations in an order you specify.
For example it is possible to add to MyEntity annotations:
#ValidEntity(groups = DependentValidations.class)
#GroupSequence({MyEntity.class, DependentValidations.class})
So all the other validation annotations on MyEntity class gonna be performed first, and after that DependentValidations group, which consists of ValidEntity.
Thus ValidEntity will be called on fully created object, and the last in order.
(DependentValidations.class - just an empty interface created somewhere nearby, like any other marker interface)
https://www.baeldung.com/javax-validation-groups will possibly describe that in much more details.
p.s. answer provided by #Innovationchef will possibly suit the case more :)

jOOQ: Allowed-Character constraints?

I am considering moving from Hibernate to jOOQ but I can't find e.g.
how to have Pattern-Constraints on a String like this in Hibernate:
#NotEmpty(message = "Firstname cannot be empty")
#Pattern(regexp = "^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$", message = "First Name can only contain characters.")
private String firstname;
How would I do that in jOOQ?
The "jOOQ way"
The "jOOQ way" to do such validation would be to create either:
A CHECK constraint in the database.
A trigger in the database.
A domain in the database.
After all, if you want to ensure data integrity, the database is where such constraints and integrity checks belong (possibly in addition to functionally equivalent client-side validation). Imagine a batch job, a Perl script, or even a JDBC statement that bypasses JSR-303 validation. You'll find yourself with corrupt data in no time.
If you do want to implement client-side validation, you can still use JSR-303 on your DTOs, which interact with your UI, for instance. But you will have to perform validation before passing the data to jOOQ for storage (as artbristol explained).
Using a Converter
You could, however, use your own custom type by declaring a Converter on individual columns and by registering such Converter with the source code generator.
Essentially, a Converter is:
public interface Converter<T, U> extends Serializable {
U from(T databaseObject);
T to(U userObject);
Class<T> fromType();
Class<U> toType();
}
In your case, you could implement your annotations as such:
public class NotEmptyAlphaNumericValidator implements Converter<String, String> {
// Validation
public String to(String userObject) {
assertNotEmpty(userObject);
assertMatches(userObject, "^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$");
return userObject;
}
// Boilerplate
public String from(String databaseObject) { return databaseObject; }
public Class<String> fromType() { return String.class; }
public Class<String> toType() { return String.class; }
}
Note that this is more of a workaround, as Converter hasn't been designed for this use-case, even if it can perfectly implement it.
Using formal client-side validation
There's also a pending feature request #4543 to add more support for client-side validation. As of jOOQ 3.7, this is not yet implemented.
I recommend you don't try to use jOOQ in a 'hibernate/JPA' way. Leave the jOOQ generated classes as they are and map to your own domain classes manually, which you are free to annotate however you like. You can then call a JSR validator before you attempt to persist them.
For example, jOOQ might generate the following class
public class BookRecord extends UpdatableRecordImpl<BookRecord> {
private String firstname;
public void setId(Integer value) { /* ... */ }
public Integer getId() { /* ... */ }
}
You can create your own domain object
public class Book {
#NotEmpty(message = "Firstname cannot be empty")
#Pattern(regexp = "^[a-zA-Z0-9_]*$", message = "First Name can only contain characters.")
private String firstname;
public void setId(Integer value) { /* ... */ }
public Integer getId() { /* ... */ }
}
and map by hand once you've retrieved a BookRecord, in your DAO layer
Book book = new Book();
book.setId(bookRecord.getId());
book.setFirstname(bookRecord.getFirstname());
This seems quite tedious (and ORM tries to spare you this tedium) but actually it scales quite well to complicated domain objects, in my opinion, and it's always easy to figure out the flow of data in your application.

How to get old entity value in #HandleBeforeSave event to determine if a property is changed or not?

I'm trying to get the old entity in a #HandleBeforeSave event.
#Component
#RepositoryEventHandler(Customer.class)
public class CustomerEventHandler {
private CustomerRepository customerRepository;
#Autowired
public CustomerEventHandler(CustomerRepository customerRepository) {
this.customerRepository = customerRepository;
}
#HandleBeforeSave
public void handleBeforeSave(Customer customer) {
System.out.println("handleBeforeSave :: customer.id = " + customer.getId());
System.out.println("handleBeforeSave :: new customer.name = " + customer.getName());
Customer old = customerRepository.findOne(customer.getId());
System.out.println("handleBeforeSave :: new customer.name = " + customer.getName());
System.out.println("handleBeforeSave :: old customer.name = " + old.getName());
}
}
In the event I try to get the old entity using the findOne method but this return the new event. Probably because of Hibernate/Repository caching in the current session.
Is there a way to get the old entity?
I need this to determine if a given property is changed or not. In case the property is changes I need to perform some action.
If using Hibernate, you could simply detach the new version from the session and load the old version:
#RepositoryEventHandler
#Component
public class PersonEventHandler {
#PersistenceContext
private EntityManager entityManager;
#HandleBeforeSave
public void handlePersonSave(Person newPerson) {
entityManager.detach(newPerson);
Person currentPerson = personRepository.findOne(newPerson.getId());
if (!newPerson.getName().equals(currentPerson.getName)) {
//react on name change
}
}
}
Thanks Marcel Overdijk, for creating the ticket -> https://jira.spring.io/browse/DATAREST-373
I saw the other workarounds for this issue and want to contribute my workaround as well, cause I think it´s quite simple to implement.
First, set a transient flag in your domain model (e.g. Account):
#JsonIgnore
#Transient
private boolean passwordReset;
#JsonIgnore
public boolean isPasswordReset() {
return passwordReset;
}
#JsonProperty
public void setPasswordReset(boolean passwordReset) {
this.passwordReset = passwordReset;
}
Second, check the flag in your EventHandler:
#Component
#RepositoryEventHandler
public class AccountRepositoryEventHandler {
#Resource
private PasswordEncoder passwordEncoder;
#HandleBeforeSave
public void onResetPassword(Account account) {
if (account.isPasswordReset()) {
account.setPassword(encodePassword(account.getPassword()));
}
}
private String encodePassword(String plainPassword) {
return passwordEncoder.encode(plainPassword);
}
}
Note: For this solution you need to send an additionally resetPassword = true parameter!
For me, I´m sending a HTTP PATCH to my resource endpoint with the following request payload:
{
"passwordReset": true,
"password": "someNewSecurePassword"
}
You're currently using a spring-data abstraction over hibernate.
If the find returns the new values, spring-data has apparently already attached the object to the hibernate session.
I think you have three options:
Fetch the object in a separate session/transaction before the current season is flushed. This is awkward and requires very subtle configuration.
Fetch the previous version before spring attached the new object. This is quite doable. You could do it in the service layer before handing the object to the repository. You can, however not save an object too an hibernate session when another infect with the same type and id it's known to our. Use merge or evict in that case.
Use a lower level hibernate interceptor as described here. As you see the onFlushDirty has both values as parameters. Take note though, that hibernate normally does not query for previous state of you simply save an already persisted entity. In stead a simple update is issued in the db (no select). You can force the select by configuring select-before-update on your entity.
Create following and extend your entities with it:
#MappedSuperclass
public class OEntity<T> {
#Transient
T originalObj;
#Transient
public T getOriginalObj(){
return this.originalObj;
}
#PostLoad
public void onLoad(){
ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
try {
String serialized = mapper.writeValueAsString(this);
this.originalObj = (T) mapper.readValue(serialized, this.getClass());
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
I had exactly this need and resolved adding a transient field to the entity to keep the old value, and modifying the setter method to store the previous value in the transient field.
Since json deserializing uses setter methods to map rest data to the entity, in the RepositoryEventHandler I will check the transient field to track changes.
#Column(name="STATUS")
private FundStatus status;
#JsonIgnore
private transient FundStatus oldStatus;
public FundStatus getStatus() {
return status;
}
public FundStatus getOldStatus() {
return this.oldStatus;
}
public void setStatus(FundStatus status) {
this.oldStatus = this.status;
this.status = status;
}
from application logs:
2017-11-23 10:17:56,715 CompartmentRepositoryEventHandler - beforeSave begin
CompartmentEntity [status=ACTIVE, oldStatus=CREATED]
Spring Data Rest can't and likely won't ever be able to do this due to where the events are fired from. If you're using Hibernate you can use Hibernate spi events and event listeners to do this, you can implement PreUpdateEventListener and then register your class with the EventListenerRegistry in the sessionFactory. I created a small spring library to handle all of the setup for you.
https://github.com/teastman/spring-data-hibernate-event
If you're using Spring Boot, the gist of it works like this, add the dependency:
<dependency>
<groupId>io.github.teastman</groupId>
<artifactId>spring-data-hibernate-event</artifactId>
<version>1.0.0</version>
</dependency>
Then add the annotation #HibernateEventListener to any method where the first parameter is the entity you want to listen to, and the second parameter is the Hibernate event that you want to listen for. I've also added the static util function getPropertyIndex to more easily get access to the specific property you want to check, but you can also just look at the raw Hibernate event.
#HibernateEventListener
public void onUpdate(MyEntity entity, PreUpdateEvent event) {
int index = getPropertyIndex(event, "name");
if (event.getOldState()[index] != event.getState()[index]) {
// The name changed.
}
}
Just another solution using model:
public class Customer {
#JsonIgnore
private String name;
#JsonIgnore
#Transient
private String newName;
public void setName(String name){
this.name = name;
}
#JsonProperty("name")
public void setNewName(String newName){
this.newName = newName;
}
#JsonProperty
public void getName(String name){
return name;
}
public void getNewName(String newName){
return newName;
}
}
Alternative to consider. Might be reasonable if you need some special handling for this use-case then treat it separately. Do not allow direct property writing on the object. Create a separate endpoint with a custom controller to rename customer.
Example request:
POST /customers/{id}/identity
{
"name": "New name"
}
I had the same problem, but I wanted the old entity available in the save(S entity) method of a REST repository implementation (Spring Data REST).
What I did was to load the old entity using a 'clean' entity manager from which I create my QueryDSL query:
#Override
#Transactional
public <S extends Entity> S save(S entity) {
EntityManager cleanEM = entityManager.getEntityManagerFactory().createEntityManager();
JPAQuery<AccessControl> query = new JPAQuery<AccessControl>(cleanEM);
//here do what I need with the query which can retrieve all old values
cleanEM.close();
return super.save(entity);
}
The following worked for me. Without starting a new thread the hibernate session will provide the already updated version. Starting another thread is a way to have a separate JPA session.
#PreUpdate
Thread.start {
if (entity instanceof MyEntity) {
entity.previous = myEntityCrudRepository.findById(entity?.id).get()
}
}.join()
Just let me know if anybody would like more context.
Don't know if you're still after an answer, and this is probably a bit 'hacky', but you could form a query with an EntityManager and fetch the object that way ...
#Autowired
EntityManager em;
#HandleBeforeSave
public void handleBeforeSave(Customer obj) {
Query q = em.createQuery("SELECT a FROM CustomerRepository a WHERE a.id=" + obj.getId());
Customer ret = q.getSingleResult();
// ret should contain the 'before' object...
}

JSR-303 / Spring MVC - validate conditionally using groups

I worked out a concept to conditionally validate using JSR 303 groups. "Conditionally" means that I have some fields which are only relevant if another field has a specific value.
Example: There is an option to select whether to register as a person or as a company. When selecting company, the user has to fill a field containing the name of the company.
Now I thought I use groups for that:
class RegisterForm
{
public interface BasicCheck {}
public interface UserCheck {}
public interface CompanyCheck {}
#NotNull(groups = BasicCheck.class)
private Boolean isCompany
#NotNull(groups = UserCheck.class)
private String firstName;
#NotNull(groups = UserCheck.class)
private String lastName;
#NotNull(groups = CompanyCheck.class)
private String companyName;
// getters / setters ...
}
In my controller, I validate step by step depending on the respective selection:
#Autowired
SmartValidator validator;
public void onRequest(#ModelAttribute("registerForm") RegisterForm registerForm, BindingResult result)
{
validator.validate(registerForm, result, RegisterForm.BasicCheck.class);
if (result.hasErrors()
return;
// basic check successful => we can process fields which are covered by this check
if (registerForm.getIsCompany())
{
validator.validate(registerForm, result, RegisterForm.CompanyCheck.class)
}
else
{
validator.validate(registerForm, result, RegisterForm.UserCheck.class);
}
if (!result.hasErrors())
{
// process registration
}
}
I only want to validate what must be validated. If the user selects "company" fills a field with invalid content and then switches back to "user", the invalid company related content must be ignored by the validator. A solution would be to clear those fields using Javascript, but I also want my forms to work with javascript disabled. This is why I totally like the approach shown above.
But Spring breaks this idea due to data binding. Before validation starts, Spring binds the data to registerForm. It adds error to result if, for instance, types are incompatible (expected int-value, but user filled the form with letters). This is a problem as these errors are shown in the JSP-view by <form:errors /> tags
Now I found a way to prevent Spring from adding those errors to the binding result by implementing a custom BindingErrorProcessor. If a field contains null I know that there was a validation error. In my concept null is not allowed - every field gets annotated with #NotNull plus the respective validation group.
As I am new to Spring and JSR-303 I wonder, whether I am totally on the wrong path. The fact that I have to implement a couple of things on my own makes me uncertain. Is this a clean solution? Is there a better solution for the same problem, as I think this is a common problem?
EDIT
Please see my answer here if you are interested in my solution in detail: https://stackoverflow.com/a/30500985/395879
You are correct that Spring MVC is a bit picky in this regard,and it is a common problem. But there are work-arounds:
Make all your backing fields strings, and do number/date etc conversions and null checks manually.
Use JavaScript to set fields to null when they become irrelevant.
Use JavaScript to validate fields when they are entered. This will fix almost all of your problems.
Good luck!
I know this question is old, but I came upon it looking for an answer for a different situation.
I think for your situation you could use inheritance for the forms and then use two controller methods:
The forms would look like this:
public class RegistrationForm
{
// Common fields go here.
}
public class UserRegistrationForm
extends RegistrationForm
{
#NotNull
private String firstName;
#NotNull
private String lastName;
// getters / setters ...
}
public class CompanyRegistrationForm
extends RegistrationForm
{
#NotNull
private String companyName;
// getters / setters ...
}
The controller methods would look like this:
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.POST, params = "isCompany=false")
public void onRequest(
#ModelAttribute("registerForm") #Valid UserRegistrationForm form,
BindingResult result)
{
if (!result.hasErrors())
{
// process registration
}
}
#RequestMapping(method = RequestMethod.POST, params = "isCompany=true")
public void onRequest(
#ModelAttribute("registerForm") #Valid CompanyRegistrationForm form,
BindingResult result)
{
if (!result.hasErrors())
{
// process registration
}
}
Notice that the #RequestMapping annotations include a params attribute so the value of the isCompany parameter determines which method is called.
Also notice that the #Valid annotation is place on the form parameter.
Finally, no groups are needed in this case.

default value for JAX-RS POST bean property

I have the following JAX-RS resource:
#POST
public Response createPerson(
final User user) {
...
}
and User bean is:
public class User {
protected String lastName;
protected String role;
#DefaultValue("true")
protected Boolean active;
#DefaultValue("dd.MM.yyyy")
protected String dateFormat;
...//getters and setters
}
When I don't specify values for 'active' and 'dateFormat' I expect them to be filled with default values. But they are null.
I've read docs for #DefaultValue and it seems to be not suitable for my scenario. But how can I ask jersey to fill these absent properties wiith defaults?
Edit:
I want to use annotations instead of the code (e.g. in constructor) because I want to be able to automatically generate API documentation (e.g. swagger). Swagger already supports #DefaultValue when providing parameter info, but I can extend it, if another approach with annotations is used.
Of course I can use code together with swagger-specific annotations, but this leads to duplications. I'd rather use same meta-info to get both application logic and documentation. I'm ok with custom annotations, while extending both jersey and swagger.
You could set the defaults either directly in the class definition or in the no-arg constructor, all in plain old java, no need for any annotations. When using the primitive type instead of the wrapper, active would default to false.
Just as an example:
public static class User {
public boolean primActive;
public Boolean wrapActive;
public boolean consActive;
public User() {
consActive = true;
}
}
The resource:
#POST
#Path("foo")
public User getUser( User user ) {
return user;
}
When posting an empty request (when using json: {}), the following is returned.
{
primActive: false
consActive: true
}

Categories

Resources