reformat add proxy support commit

[mansfieldj3]

This change enables users to configure proxy settings directly in Snowflake connections via extra parameters instead of relying solely on system environment variables, providing better isolation and control.

What changes:

• Add proxy_host, proxy_port, proxy_user, and proxy_password fields to SnowflakeHook connection configuration
• Proxy parameters are extracted from connection extras and passed to snowflake.connector.connect()
• UI fields added for proxy configuration in connection form
• Support for both modern field names and backcompat prefixes

Why:

• Enables team-specific proxy configurations without affecting system-wide settings
• Prevents unintended proxy usage from environment variables
• Provides more granular control over network routing per connection

Tests:

• test_get_conn_params_with_proxy_host_only
• test_get_conn_params_with_proxy_host_and_port
• test_get_conn_params_with_proxy_port_as_int
• test_get_conn_params_with_proxy_full_config
• test_get_conn_params_with_proxy_backcompat_prefix
• test_get_conn_with_proxy_should_call_connect

Closes: #59078

[mansfieldj3]

Reformatting of previous merge which was closed without being added

[mansfieldj3]

New merge request should resolve previous static errors and issue with using conn_params = hook._get_conn_params not conn_params = hook._get_conn_params()

[mansfieldj3]

somehow managed to only delete one of two trailing spaces on line 439 :|

[mansfieldj3]

@potiuk can you review out this request when you get the chance? Reasonably simple change to add proxy support to the snowflake hook but if you have any suggestions let me know

[potiuk]

You should make sure if proxy_password is masked automaticall when logging connection - look at our secrets masker - I am not sure if "proxy_password" will be redacted automatically by password substring in the name, or whether you need to update the default fields to contain proxy_password or maybe implement partial match when masking values.

[mansfieldj3]

I've added proxy_password to the default DEFAULT_SENSITIVE_FIELDS variables in secret masker, I think because it had both proxy and password in the name it probably would have been masked but given how complex the logic is I'd rather play it safe and remove if not needed.

[potiuk]

given how complex the logic is I'd rather play it safe and remove if not needed.

Yeah

[boring-cyborg]

Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request! You are invited to check our Issue Tracker for additional contributions.