The CreatorCon Call for Content is officially open! Get started here.

Issue with Remote file import after washington upgrade

Sangeetha Harin
Tera Contributor

Hi Everyone, 

 

We are using Remote file import to fetch the csv file from Mid-server and processing the record to update user table. It stopped working after washington upgrade. Getting the below error. 

var remoteFileImport = new CSMIDServerRemoteFileImport();

remoteFileImport.getRemoteFileAndUploadToInstance()

Root cause of JavaScriptException: java.lang.IllegalAccessException

 

Any lead will be really helpful. 

 

Thanks

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

napatil24
Tera Expert

Update the MID server Wrapper file with Below 2 line

 

in file ---  agent/conf/wrapper.conf file
---------------------- Below 2 line add --------------------------------------
wrapper.java.additional.201=--add-opens=java.base/sun.net.www.protocol.https=ALL-UNNAMED
wrapper.java.additional.202=--add-opens=java.base/sun.net.www.http=ALL-UNNAMED

View solution in original post

26 REPLIES 26

pkruzan
Tera Contributor

Hello! Same issue here. We've tried all these steps, sadly no-go. We are getting an ECC queue error on the input, but the output is "processed." However, there are no changes to records we are updating. Error details below:

 

JavaScript evaluation error on:&#10;var remoteFileImport = new CSMIDServerRemoteFileImport(); &#10;remoteFileImport.getRemoteFileAndUploadToInstance()&#10;Root cause of JavaScriptException: java.io.FileNotFoundException &#10;" probe_time="553" result_code="900000"><result error="JavaScript evaluation error on:&#10;var remoteFileImport = new CSMIDServerRemoteFileImport(); &#10;remoteFileImport.getRemoteFileAndUploadToInstance()&#10;Root cause of JavaScriptException: java.io.FileNotFoundException &#10;"

MortenPettersen
Tera Contributor

Does anyone have more knowledge about what exactly these parameters are doing? Can there be any negative sides to it, security wise?

I'd also be interested to know more about any particular security implications to configuring this workaround for ALL-UNNAMED. Seems like it could increases the attack surface and potentially expose critical implementation details that should remain protected. Is it possible to open access to specific libraries only instead of ALL-UNNAMED, per above?

 

JamesLindsay
Giga Guru

I'm still wondering why this wasn't or isn't a native option of ServiceNow

I couldn't agree more. Given that it's clearly possible, it seems odd that ServiceNow wouldn't provide this as an option.