Re-implemented RhythmOne audit beacon in prebid 1.0 interface

[jstocker76]

Type of change

• Bugfix
• Feature
• New bidder adapter
• Code style update (formatting, local variables)
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
• Build related changes
• CI related changes
• Other

Description of change

Re-implemented our fraud audit beacon in the 1.0 adapter. This beacon was present in the previous versions of rhythm one's bidder, but was removed for the sake of expediting the 1.0 version changes.

• test parameters for validating bids

    {
      bidder: 'rhythmone',
      params: 
      { 
        placementId: '411806',
        endpoint: "//tag.1rx.io/rmp/72721/0/mvo?z=1r" // only required for testing.  this api guarantees no 204 responses
      }
    }

Be sure to test the integration with your adserver using the Hello World sample page.

• contact email of the adapter’s maintainer
• official adapter submission

Other information

[mike-chowla]

Test coverage is under 80%:

[mike-chowla]

The code in the pull request uses $$PREBID_GLOBAL$$

[mike-chowla]

Code coverage is below the 80% requirement

$$PREBID_GLOBAL$$ should not be used.

[jstocker76]

is there another way I can get the version of prebid without using $$PREBID_GLOBAL$$?

[mike-chowla]

For the version, you can have it substituted by webpack at build time using '$prebid.version$'

[mike-chowla]

The earlier issues are fixed but I noticed something new:

When syncOptions.pixelEnabled is off, the code goes and creates its own image to fire off a sync. If the publisher has disabled syncs, no sync should be done.

[jstocker76]

The purpose of this beacon is to detect fraudulent use of the adapter. If it can be easily disabled, it has no point.

What is the meaning of "user sync" in this context? This beacon doesn't drop any tracking cookies.

[mike-chowla]

So my understanding is that the adapters are not supposed to trigger beacons except as a user syncs. @mkendall07 , you can take a look to see if this is permitted or not? Line 66 in the adapter

[mkendall07]

@mike-chowla
correct. @jstocker76
it looks like the code on line 66 is unnecessary and can be dropped.

[jstocker76]

dropped

[jstocker76]

the details of that check failure seem to be unrelated to my changes...

[mike-chowla]

Yeah, I can not see how they would be related. Tests past on my machine.

[mike-chowla]

LGTM

Only note is the tests show as failing. However, the output of the test failures is unrelated to the final change. Tests pass on my machine.

[mkendall07]

lgtm