installation-telemetry: add customer ID

[adrienthebo]

Description

This pull request exposes the GitPod Customer ID field in installation telemetry.

Related Issue(s)

This issue resolves #10183.

How to test

The customerID field will be available in the Gitpod Admin/Settings page, displayed in the installation-telemetry job output, and will be present in the segment.io telemetry.

Telemetry Disabled

Dashboard: Admin/Settings:

Installation telemetry job:

 {
  "level": "info",
  "message": "installation-telemetry is not permitted to send - exiting",
  "serviceContext": {
    "service": "installation-telemetry",
    "version": "commit-2b1c7e10da04762651d753db7b1fb1b9954b3e70"
  },
  "severity": "INFO",
  "time": "2022-06-24T15:28:09Z"
}

Telemetry enabled, Customer ID disabled

Dashboard: Admin/Settings:

Installation Telemetry job:

{
  "level": "info",
  "message": "installation-telemetry has successfully sent data - exiting",
  "serviceContext": {
    "service": "installation-telemetry",
    "version": "commit-2b1c7e10da04762651d753db7b1fb1b9954b3e70"
  },
  "severity": "INFO",
  "telemetry": {
    "userId": "cfcc2cfa-9ac6-482f-879e-f327c260c533",
    "event": "Installation telemetry",
    "timestamp": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
    "properties": {
      "totalInstances": 0,
      "totalUsers": 1,
      "totalWorkspaces": 0,
      "version": "gitpod-custom-alt-10183-sh-telem-license.30"
    }
  },
  "time": "2022-06-24T15:36:05Z"
}

Telemetry enabled, Customer ID enabled, empty customer ID

Dashboard: Admin/Settings:

Installation Telemetry job:

{
  "level": "info",
  "message": "installation-telemetry has successfully sent data - exiting",
  "serviceContext": {
    "service": "installation-telemetry",
    "version": "commit-2b1c7e10da04762651d753db7b1fb1b9954b3e70"
  },
  "severity": "INFO",
  "telemetry": {
    "userId": "cfcc2cfa-9ac6-482f-879e-f327c260c533",
    "event": "Installation telemetry",
    "timestamp": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
    "properties": {
      "customerID": "",
      "totalInstances": 0,
      "totalUsers": 1,
      "totalWorkspaces": 0,
      "version": "gitpod-custom-alt-10183-sh-telem-license.30"
    }
  },
  "time": "2022-06-24T15:39:50Z"
}

Installation telemetry enabled, customer ID enabled, customer ID set

Dashboard: Settings/Admin:

Installation telemetry job:

{
  "level": "info",
  "message": "installation-telemetry has successfully sent data - exiting",
  "serviceContext": {
    "service": "installation-telemetry",
    "version": "commit-2b1c7e10da04762651d753db7b1fb1b9954b3e70"
  },
  "severity": "INFO",
  "telemetry": {
    "userId": "cfcc2cfa-9ac6-482f-879e-f327c260c533",
    "event": "Installation telemetry",
    "timestamp": "0001-01-01T00:00:00Z",
    "properties": {
      "customerID": "Tessier Ashpool S.A.",
      "totalInstances": 0,
      "totalUsers": 1,
      "totalWorkspaces": 0,
      "version": "gitpod-custom-alt-10183-sh-telem-license.30"
    }
  },
  "time": "2022-06-24T15:48:56Z"
}

Release Notes

[self-hosted] Installation telemetry optionally includes the Gitpod customer ID

Documentation

This change is user facing, and when enabled adds information that removes the pseudononymous guarantees in our documentation. We'll amend that in a separate pull request against the website.

[adrienthebo]

This looks like the telemetry data provider needs to be relocated into components/server/ee/src/installation-admin, but the overall approach is ready for review.

[nandajavarma]

Works great! Great work Adrien! 🤩

[lucasvaltl]

Hey @adrienthebo, we originally discussed two implementation paths here - one with the license ID, and one with a newly added customer ID as a (hidden) field in the replicated license. We had plan was to use the customer ID (reasoning was outlined in this comment) but I had failed to transfer this state into the main issue description (Sorry!). Is it possible to switch the implementation to use customer id instead of the license ID?

[werft-gitpod-dev-com]

started the job as gitpod-build-alt-10183-sh-telem-license.7 because the annotations in the pull request description changed
(with .werft/ from main)

[werft-gitpod-dev-com]

started the job as gitpod-build-alt-10183-sh-telem-license.8 because the annotations in the pull request description changed
(with .werft/ from main)

[werft-gitpod-dev-com]

started the job as gitpod-build-alt-10183-sh-telem-license.9 because the annotations in the pull request description changed
(with .werft/ from main)

[lucasvaltl]

This looks good - two things that are missing as per the original ticket:

• Allow users to specifically opt-out of this identifiable info (@gtsiolis I think it would be great to get your design take on such a two-layer opt out)
  --> How much additional work do you think this is? The reason for including this was to avoid customers opting out completely just because we are now sending data that allows us to know who the owner of an installation is. I was thinking of having an additional checkbox that is ticked by default stating "Include Customer ID". Happy to chat in sync about this - just reach out :)

• Make sure this is communicated in honesty to users that we are doing this and why we are doing this. Explain to them how they can opt-out.
  --> What are your plans here? We should at the very least update our docs which state that "We do not collect any data that allows conclusions to be drawn about the owner of the installation." and notify #t_customer_experience on slack :)

[corneliusludmann]

Just my 2 cents: Given that the customer ID is included only when we explicitly add it to the license (and we could ask the customers for consent before we do this), in my option we could add this in a separate PR (especially when we want to give George some time to give his input). What do you think?

[geropl]

@adrienthebo I was looking to review, but couldn't because the build seems to fail. 😕

[adrienthebo]

@adrienthebo I was looking to review, but couldn't because the build seems to fail. 😕

@geropl I'm rebasing onto main to remove a merge conflict, should be fixed up in a bit. Thanks for looking at this!

[geropl]

LGTM, tested and works as expected 👍

[mrsimonemms]

LGTM

[adrienthebo]

/unhold

[gtsiolis]

Came back a bit late for your comment[1] @lucasvaltl as I was offline for a week, but left some feedback in a relevant discussion (internal). FWIW, using a second checkbox sounds like a good minimal viable change.

Also, thanks @adrienthebo for shipping this and including a helpful section description[1] below the section title that also provides some visual balance. ✨