Fixes#9401.
This adds a FAKE_EMAIL_DOMAIN setting, which should be used if
EXTERNAL_HOST is not a valid domain, and something else is needed to
form bot and dummy user emails (if email visibility is turned off).
It defaults to EXTERNAL_HOST.
get_fake_email_domain() should be used to get this value. It validates
that it's correctly set - that it can be used to form valid emails.
If it's not set correctly, an exception is raised. This is the right
approach, because it's undesirable to have the server seemingly
peacefully operating with that setting misconfigured, as that could
mask some hidden sneaky bugs due to UserProfiles with invalid emails,
which would blow up the moment some code that does validate the emails
is called.
Without disturbing the flow of the existing code for configuring
embedded bots too much, we now use the config_options feature to
allow incoming webhook type bot to be configured via. the "/bots"
endpoint of the API.
Previous cleanups (mostly the removals of Python __future__ imports)
were done in a way that introduced leading newlines. Delete leading
newlines from all files, except static/assets/zulip-emoji/NOTICE,
which is a verbatim copy of the Apache 2.0 license.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
The decorator running at import time was causing directory
creation in the project's root.
One could imagine linting for this, but it seems unlikely that similar
code will be added in the future; the problem one would be trying to
solved is already addressed by default in the framework now.
tests now ran in 7.649s from 9.297s. And this test works just as well
with 3 bots, since only 3 database queries with 3 bots confirms we're
not doing linear queries in the number of bots in the organization.
Bots are not allowed to use the same name as
other users in the realm (either bot or human).
This is kind of a big commit, but I wanted to
combine the post/patch (aka add/edit) checks
into one commit, since it's a change in policy
that affects both codepaths.
A lot of the noise is in tests. We had good
coverage on the previous code, including some places
like event testing where we were expediently
not bothering to use different names for
different bots in some longer tests. And then
of course I test some new scenarios that are relevant
with the new policy.
There are two new functions:
check_bot_name_available:
very simple Django query
check_change_bot_full_name:
this diverges from the 3-line
check_change_full_name, where the latter
is still used for the "humans" use case
And then we just call those in appropriate places.
Note that there is still a loophole here
where you can get two bots with the same
name if you reactivate a bot named Fred
that was inactive when the second bot named
Fred was created. Also, we don't attempt
to fix historical data. So this commit
shouldn't be considered any kind of lockdown,
it's just meant to help people from
inadvertently creating two bots of the same
name where they don't intend to. For more
context, we are continuing to allow two
human users in the same realm to have the
same full name, and our code should generally
be tolerant of that possibility. (A good
example is our new mention syntax, which disambiguates
same-named people using ids.)
It's also worth noting that our web app client
doesn't try to scrub full_name from its payload in
situations where the user has actually only modified other
fields in the "Edit bot" UI. Starting here
we just handle this on the server, since it's
easy to fix there, and even if we fixed it in the web
app, there's no guarantee that other clients won't be
just as brute force. It wasn't exactly broken before,
but we'd needlessly write rows to audit tables.
Fixes#10509
This commit adds some more tests related to patching
a bot's `default_sending_stream`.
Unfortunately, this didn't reach the code that I was
intending to add line coverage to, since checks happen
higher up in the stack, but the test code I added
is probably worthwhile.
It's sorta an unusual state to get into, to have a user own a
deactivated bot, when they can't create a bot of that type, but
definitely a valid possibility that we should be checking for.
Fixes#10087.
This fixes a test flake introduced here:
317a2fff2a
We need a higher bogus bot owner id to prevent
flakes where our userid sequence gets to 100. (Tests
aren't completely deterministic in what data you
use, since sequences don't get rolled back when
you roll back transactions.)
This adds a common function `access_bot_by_id` to access bot id within
same realm. It probably fixes some corner case bugs where we weren't
checking for deactivated bots when regenerating API keys.
This reflects the changes to the default URL publicly
displayed to the user. It also changes the default
URL of the default test server outgoing webhook, which
prevented the test server flaskbotrc from working out
of the box.
This isn't a complete long-term fix, in that ideally we'd be doing
this check at the view layer, but various structural things make that
annoying, and we'll want this test either way.
This fixes a bug where the endpoint for editing bot users would allow
an organization administrator to edit the full name of a bot user.
A combination of this an another recently fixed bug made it possible
for this process to set a `bot_owner` for a non-bot user; so we also
include a migration to fix that for any users that might have had our
model invariants corrupted in that way.
These changes are in one commit, since the previous typing of check_url
does not match the centralized strict definition (object/Any vs Text),
actually already used elsewhere in validator.py, and also had a different
API.
check_url is updated here to match the API of the other check_* functions,
ie. val is an object (not Text) & returns Optional[str]. It also now checks
the value is text explicitly at run-time, which was only type-checked
previously. Tests are updated accordingly.
"incorrect" here means rejected by a bot's validate_config() method.
A common scenario for this is validating API keys before the bot is
created. If validate_config() fails, the bot will not be created.
It catches the `UserProfile.DoesNotExist` exception and
hence prevent internal server error.
Also remove option to select empty bot owner.
Fixes: #8334.
This is the first step for allowing users
to edit a bot's service entries, name the
outgoing webhook configuration entries. The
chosen data structures allow for a future
with multiple services per bot; right now,
only one service per bot is supported.
This adds UI fields in the bot settings for specifying
configuration values like API keys for a bot. The names
and placeholder values for each bot's config fields are
fetched from the bot's <bot>.conf template file in the
zulip_bots package. This also adds giphy and followup
as embedded bots.
This commit adds a setting to limit creation of generic bots
to admins for realms that want that restriction. (Generic
bots, apart from being considered spammy on some realms,
have less locked down permissions than webhook bots).
Fixes#7066.
Adds support to add "Embedded bot" Service objects. This service
handles every embedded bot.
Extracted from "Embedded bots: Add support to add embedded bots from
UI" by Robert Honig.
Tweaked by tabbott to be disabled by default.
Some bots have class names that differ from their module name,
e.g. `helloworld.py` vs. `HelloWorld`. Our tests should accept
all of these, as long as a handler class is present.
We now use a `.values` query to get just the fields we need
in order to fulfill '/json/users' requests.
The main benefit is that we don't do O(N) queries for bot
owners, but we also have less data on UserProfile to process.
Previously, the bot domain was calculated correctly in most
circumstances, but if you were using the root domain, it would be
e.g. ".chat.zulip.org", not "chat.zulip.org". We fix this, with
perhaps more use of setting REALMS_HAVE_SUBDOMAINS than would be ideal
if we weren't about to set that True unconditionally.