We use the already existing server level setting to only allow
settings to be set to system groups, not a named user defined
group as well, in production. But we allow to settings to be set
to any named or anonymous user group in tests and development server.
"can_mention_group" setting can be set to user defined groups
because some of the realms already do that in production.
The existing server level setting is also renamed to make it clear
that both user defined groups and anonymous groups are not allowed
if that setting is set to False.
This commit also changes the error message to be consistent for the
case when a setting cannot be set to user defined groups as per
server level and setting and when a particular setting cannot be set
to user defined groups due to the configuration of that particular
setting. For this we add a new class SystemGroupRequiredError in
exceptions.py so that we need not re-write the error message in
multiple places.
This commit adds a server level setting which controls whether the setting
can be set to anonymous user groups. We only allow it in the tests for
now because the UI can only handle named user groups.
This commit fixes the code store correct old value in audit
log data when changing can_mention_group setting from a
anonymous group to another anonymous group. The bug was
because the old value was being computed after updating
the UserGroup object with new members and subgroups and
is fixed by computing the old value for all the cases
and passing it to do_change_user_group_permission_setting.
This commit renames are_both_setting_values_equal function
to are_both_group_setting_values_equal to make it clear
that this function is used to compare value of group
settings.
This commit moves validate_group_setting_value_change,
are_both_setting_values_equal and parse_group_setting_value
functions, which are used for updating the group settings, to
"zerver.lib.user_groups" as these functions will also be used for
group based realm and stream settings and "zerver.lib.user_groups"
file seems a better place to place such functions which are used
at multiple places.
For same reasons, we also move GroupSettingChangeRequest dataclass
to "zerver.lib.user_groups" file.
This commit updates access_user_group_for_setting
to support setting anonymous user groups for
different settings.
There are some lines without coverage as of this
commit, but the next few commits would add tests
covering those.
This commit fixes the queries to get members and subgroups for
user group objects returned by user_groups_in_realm_serialized
to not include the UserGroup objects which are not linked to a
NamedUserGroup object, since the function only returns data for
NamedUserGroup objects.
This commit removes name, description, is_system_group and
can_mention_group fields from UserGroup model and rename
them in NamedUserGroup model.
Fixes#29554.
This commit adds get_recursive_strict_subgroups function
which returns all the subgroups but not includes the user
group passed to the function.
We also update the test to check subgroups of named user
groups using the get_recursive_strict_subgroups function.
This is fine as we already test the get_recursive_subgroups
function.
Earlier a extra audit log entry of type
USER_GROUP_GROUP_BASED_SETTING_CHANGED was made when a new user
group is created. This commit updates the code to not create
that audit log entry.
There is no need to create these entry as we would still
have the required data from the "OLD_VALUE" field in the
audit log entry created when changing the setting and this
also makes it consistent with the entries created for
other operations like stream creation.
This commit adds new setting for controlling who can access
all users in the realm which would have "Everyone" and
"Members only" option.
Fixes part of #10970.
This commit adds code to pass configuration objects for group
permission settings in register response to clients such that
we do need to duplicate that data in clients and can avoid
future bugs due to inconsistency.
The "server_supported_permission_settings" field is included
in the response if "realm" is present in "fetch_event_types",
as this is what we do for other server-related fields.
This commit moves constants for system group names to a new
"SystemGroups" class so that we can use these group names
in multiple classes in models.py without worrying about the
order of defining them.
We now pass the complete configuration object for a setting to
access_user_group_for_setting instead of passing the configuration
object's fields as different variables.
This is important because the "guests" value isn't one that we'd
expect anyone to pick intentionally, and in particular isn't an
available option for the similar/adjacent "email invitations" setting.
**Background**
User groups are expected to comply with the DAG constraint for the
many-to-many inter-group membership. The check for this constraint has
to be performed recursively so that we can find all direct and indirect
subgroups of the user group to be added.
This kind of check is vulnerable to phantom reads which is possible at
the default read committed isolation level because we cannot guarantee
that the check is still valid when we are adding the subgroups to the
user group.
**Solution**
To avoid having another transaction concurrently update one of the
to-be-subgroup after the recursive check is done, and before the subgroup
is added, we use SELECT FOR UPDATE to lock the user group rows.
The lock needs to be acquired before a group membership change is about
to occur before any check has been conducted.
Suppose that we are adding subgroup B to supergroup A, the locking protocol
is specified as follows:
1. Acquire a lock for B and all its direct and indirect subgroups.
2. Acquire a lock for A.
For the removal of user groups, we acquire a lock for the user group to
be removed with all its direct and indirect subgroups. This is the special
case A=B, which is still complaint with the protocol.
**Error handling**
We currently rely on Postgres' deadlock detection to abort transactions
and show an error for the users. In the future, we might need some
recovery mechanism or at least better error handling.
**Notes**
An important note is that we need to reuse the recursive CTE query that
finds the direct and indirect subgroups when applying the lock on the
rows. And the lock needs to be acquired the same way for the addition and
removal of direct subgroups.
User membership change (as opposed to user group membership) is not
affected. Read-only queries aren't either. The locks only protect
critical regions where the user group dependency graph might violate
the DAG constraint, where users are not participating.
**Testing**
We implement a transaction test case targeting some typical scenarios
when an internal server error is expected to happen (this means that the
user group view makes the correct decision to abort the transaction when
something goes wrong with locks).
To achieve this, we add a development view intended only for unit tests.
It has a global BARRIER that can be shared across threads, so that we
can synchronize them to consistently reproduce certain potential race
conditions prevented by the database locks.
The transaction test case lanuches pairs of threads initiating possibly
conflicting requests at the same time. The tests are set up such that exactly N
of them are expected to succeed with a certain error message (while we don't
know each one).
**Security notes**
get_recursive_subgroups_for_groups will no longer fetch user groups from
other realms. As a result, trying to add/remove a subgroup from another
realm results in a UserGroup not found error response.
We also implement subgroup-specific checks in has_user_group_access to
keep permission managing in a single place. Do note that the API
currently don't have a way to violate that check because we are only
checking the realm ID now.
We want to make the callers be more explicit about the use of the
user group being accessed, so that the later implemented database lock
can be benefited from the visibility.
This migration applies under the assumption that extra_data_json has
been populated for all existing and coming audit log entries.
- This removes the manual conversions back and forth for extra_data
throughout the codebase including the orjson.loads(), orjson.dumps(),
and str() calls.
- The custom handler used for converting Decimal is removed since
DjangoJSONEncoder handles that for extra_data.
- We remove None-checks for extra_data because it is now no longer
nullable.
- Meanwhile, we want the bouncer to support processing RealmAuditLog entries for
remote servers before and after the JSONField migration on extra_data.
- Since now extra_data should always be a dict for the newer remote
server, which is now migrated, the test cases are updated to create
RealmAuditLog objects by passing a dict for extra_data before
sending over the analytics data. Note that while JSONField allows for
non-dict values, a proper remote server always passes a dict for
extra_data.
- We still test out the legacy extra_data format because not all
remote servers have migrated to use JSONField extra_data.
This verifies that support for extra_data being a string or None has not
been dropped.
Co-authored-by: Siddharth Asthana <siddharthasthana31@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
Earlier the API endpoints related to user_group accepts and returns a
field `can_mention_group_id` which represents the ID
of user_group whose members can mention the group.
This commit renames this field to `can_mention_group`.
Translators benefit from the extra information in the field names, and
need the reordering freedom that isn’t available with multiple
positional fields.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
This commit removes "@" from name of role-based system groups
since we have added a restricion on having user group names
starting with "@" in the previous commit as they look odd in
mention syntax.
We also add a migration in this commit to update the name of
role-based system groups in existing realms to remove "@"
from the name. This migration also updates the names of
non-system user groups by removing the invalid prefixes
from their names and if there is a group already with that
name, we insted name the group as "group:{group_id}".
Fixes#26148.
We do not allow user group names to start with "@", "role:",
"user:", "stream:" and "channel:".
Group names starting with "@" look odd in mentions and
"role:", "user:" and "stream:" prefixes are reserved for
system groups which will be used in the new groups-based
permission model. We do not allow "channel:" prefix for
now just to be safe in a case where we use it instead of
"stream:" prefix for stream based groups in future.
Fixes part of #26148.
Previously we had database level restriction on length of
user group names. Now we add the same restriction to API
level as well, so we can return a better error response.
This add audit log entries when any group based setting of a user group
is updated. We store both the old and new values in extra_data, along
with the name of that setting. Entries populated during user group creation
are hardcoded to track "can_mention_group".
Potentially we can adjust "set_defaults_for_group_settings" so that it
populates realm audit logs with it, but that is out of scope for this change.
We use an atomic transaction so that the audit logs are committed
together with the updates.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
This is mostly the same as tracking subgroup changes, except that now
modified_user_group is the subgroup.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
It's worth noting that instead of adding another field to the
RealmAuditLog model, we store the modified subgroup ids in extra_data as
a JSON encoded dict with the key "subgroup_ids". We don't create audit
log entries for supergroup changes at this point.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
This also add audit log entries during user creation and role change,
because we modify system group memberships there.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
We also create RealmAuditLog entries for the initial memberships that
get added along with the creation of a UserGroup. System user groups are
not created with members so no audit logs are populated for that.
Signed-off-by: Zixuan James Li <p359101898@gmail.com>
This commit adds code to include can_mention_group_id field to
UserGroup objects passed with response of various endpoints
including "/register" endpoint and also in the group object
send with user group creation event.
Fixes a part of #25927.
Anders Kaseorg
Sahil Batra
Vector73
Ujjawal Modi
Tim Abbott
Zixuan James Li