Filed a bug for this : ADDON-54501 Filed a doc task to update the documentation for this : ADDON-54497 ... View more

Tested this out some more and was able to reproduce this.   Reason For AOB version 3.x, the encrypted field is stored with 8 stars (********) in the conf file. For example, [test_input_1] index = main access_key = ********   For AOB version 4.x, the encrypted field is stored with 6 stars (******) in the conf file. For example, [test_input_1] index = main access_key = ******   Considering your issue, old test input has access key value with 8 stars because it was created using AOB 3.x After upgrade to AOB 4.x, the code is now designed to handle values with 6 stars. Thus, it will not be able to decrypt access key value of old input as it contains 8 stars. This is a breaking change from AOB 3.x to 4.x which I think isn't documented anywhere. I'll create a ticket to make sure this is documented.   Conclusion I think the user will have to reconfigure the inputs after upgrade for this one unfortunately 😞 . ... View more

Hi @ashwini , I tried to reproduce this issue but was not able to. I created a new add-on and created a mod-input to read the password field from the configuration file. The add-on builder was then upgraded from 3.0.1 to 4.1.1. In that case also, I can get the password field via the old input configured. Can you please let me know the following things to help me understand the issue better? : 1. what EXACT versions of add-on builder did you upgrade FROM and TO? 2. What is the Splunk version you are using? 3. Is the add-on you are referring to published on the Splunk-base or can I obtain it from somewhere? It would be great if I can actually see the code. 4. Also, can you please provide detailed steps of reproduction? 5. Was the input already configured in your add-on along with add-on builder on the same machine and then you upgraded the add-on builder OR; was it imported to add-on builder 4.x and then you configured the input? ... View more

@anil8  Did you try setting some other port apart from 9997 as the receiving port on the new 3 HFs ? Does that work. Once you know the answer to that, you can have some more clarity for debugging this. ... View more