Skip to content

fix: depth decrementing was passed by reference and all same depth ch… #2740

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
ucatbas merged 2 commits into from
Jan 26, 2026
Merged

fix: depth decrementing was passed by reference and all same depth ch… #2740

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
c41144b
fix: depth decrementing was passed by reference and all same depth ch…
ucatbas Jan 22, 2026
0911720
feat: added passing and failing depth-check scenarios to check engine…
ucatbas Jan 22, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
303 changes: 303 additions & 0 deletions internal/engines/check_test.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2069,4 +2069,307 @@ var _ = Describe("check-engine", func() {
}
})
})

// DEPTH CHECK SAMPLE (3-level deep check)
depthCheckSchema := `
entity user {}

entity bottom {
relation member @user
permission check = member
}

entity middle {
relation parent @bottom
permission check = parent.check
}

entity top {
relation parent @middle
permission check = parent.check
}
`

Context("Depth Check Sample: Check", func() {
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@wied03 wied03 Jan 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did these 2 tests fail, once written, before the fixes were made in invoke.go and utils.go?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@ucatbas ucatbas Jan 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

before the changes, the case that should pass was failing. i added these tests because this scenario specifically requires a depth of 3. i included both failing and passing cases to verify the behavior.

It("Depth Check Sample: Case 1 - Depth 3 should pass for 3-level deep check", func() {
db, err := factories.DatabaseFactory(
config.Database{
Engine: "memory",
},
)

Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@wied03 wied03 Jan 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So we're using the "strict" mocking here? Where we don't just stub things, but expect things to be called in a certain order, etc. ?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@ucatbas ucatbas Jan 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes


conf, err := newSchema(depthCheckSchema)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

schemaWriter := factories.SchemaWriterFactory(db)
err = schemaWriter.WriteSchema(context.Background(), conf)

Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

type check struct {
entity string
subject string
depth int32
assertions map[string]base.CheckResult
}

relationships := []string{
"top:1#parent@middle:1#...",
"middle:1#parent@bottom:1#...",
"bottom:1#member@user:1",

"top:2#parent@middle:2#...",
"middle:2#parent@bottom:2#...",
"bottom:2#member@user:2",

"top:3#parent@middle:3#...",
"middle:3#parent@bottom:3#...",
"bottom:3#member@user:3",

"top:4#parent@middle:4#...",
"middle:4#parent@bottom:4#...",
"bottom:4#member@user:4",

"top:5#parent@middle:5#...",
"middle:5#parent@bottom:5#...",
"bottom:5#member@user:5",

"top:6#parent@middle:6#...",
"middle:6#parent@bottom:6#...",
"bottom:6#member@user:6",

"top:7#parent@middle:7#...",
"middle:7#parent@bottom:7#...",
"bottom:7#member@user:7",

"top:8#parent@middle:8#...",
"middle:8#parent@bottom:8#...",
"bottom:8#member@user:8",

"top:9#parent@middle:9#...",
"middle:9#parent@bottom:9#...",
"bottom:9#member@user:9",

"top:10#parent@middle:10#...",
"middle:10#parent@bottom:10#...",
"bottom:10#member@user:10",
}

var checks []check
for i := 1; i <= 10; i++ {
entity := fmt.Sprintf("top:%d", i)
subject := fmt.Sprintf("user:%d", i)
checks = append(checks, check{
entity: entity,
subject: subject,
depth: 3,
assertions: map[string]base.CheckResult{
"check": base.CheckResult_CHECK_RESULT_ALLOWED,
},
})
}

schemaReader := factories.SchemaReaderFactory(db)
dataReader := factories.DataReaderFactory(db)
dataWriter := factories.DataWriterFactory(db)

checkEngine := NewCheckEngine(schemaReader, dataReader)

invoker := invoke.NewDirectInvoker(
schemaReader,
dataReader,
checkEngine,
nil,
nil,
nil,
)

checkEngine.SetInvoker(invoker)

var tuples []*base.Tuple

for _, relationship := range relationships {
t, err := tuple.Tuple(relationship)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
tuples = append(tuples, t)
}

_, err = dataWriter.Write(context.Background(), "t1", database.NewTupleCollection(tuples...), database.NewAttributeCollection())
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

for _, check := range checks {
entity, err := tuple.E(check.entity)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

ear, err := tuple.EAR(check.subject)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

subject := &base.Subject{
Type: ear.GetEntity().GetType(),
Id: ear.GetEntity().GetId(),
Relation: ear.GetRelation(),
}

for permission, res := range check.assertions {
response, err := invoker.Check(context.Background(), &base.PermissionCheckRequest{
TenantId: "t1",
Entity: entity,
Subject: subject,
Permission: permission,
Metadata: &base.PermissionCheckRequestMetadata{
SnapToken: token.NewNoopToken().Encode().String(),
SchemaVersion: "",
Depth: check.depth,
},
})

Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
Expect(res).Should(Equal(response.GetCan()))
}
}
})

It("Depth Check Sample: Case 2 - Depth 2 should fail for 3-level deep check", func() {
db, err := factories.DatabaseFactory(
config.Database{
Engine: "memory",
},
)

Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

conf, err := newSchema(depthCheckSchema)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

schemaWriter := factories.SchemaWriterFactory(db)
err = schemaWriter.WriteSchema(context.Background(), conf)

Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

type check struct {
entity string
subject string
depth int32
assertions map[string]base.CheckResult
}

relationships := []string{
"top:1#parent@middle:1#...",
"middle:1#parent@bottom:1#...",
"bottom:1#member@user:1",

"top:2#parent@middle:2#...",
"middle:2#parent@bottom:2#...",
"bottom:2#member@user:2",

"top:3#parent@middle:3#...",
"middle:3#parent@bottom:3#...",
"bottom:3#member@user:3",

"top:4#parent@middle:4#...",
"middle:4#parent@bottom:4#...",
"bottom:4#member@user:4",

"top:5#parent@middle:5#...",
"middle:5#parent@bottom:5#...",
"bottom:5#member@user:5",

"top:6#parent@middle:6#...",
"middle:6#parent@bottom:6#...",
"bottom:6#member@user:6",

"top:7#parent@middle:7#...",
"middle:7#parent@bottom:7#...",
"bottom:7#member@user:7",

"top:8#parent@middle:8#...",
"middle:8#parent@bottom:8#...",
"bottom:8#member@user:8",

"top:9#parent@middle:9#...",
"middle:9#parent@bottom:9#...",
"bottom:9#member@user:9",

"top:10#parent@middle:10#...",
"middle:10#parent@bottom:10#...",
"bottom:10#member@user:10",
}

var checks []check
for i := 1; i <= 10; i++ {
entity := fmt.Sprintf("top:%d", i)
subject := fmt.Sprintf("user:%d", i)
checks = append(checks, check{
entity: entity,
subject: subject,
depth: 2,
assertions: map[string]base.CheckResult{
"check": base.CheckResult_CHECK_RESULT_DENIED,
},
})
}

schemaReader := factories.SchemaReaderFactory(db)
dataReader := factories.DataReaderFactory(db)
dataWriter := factories.DataWriterFactory(db)

checkEngine := NewCheckEngine(schemaReader, dataReader)

invoker := invoke.NewDirectInvoker(
schemaReader,
dataReader,
checkEngine,
nil,
nil,
nil,
)

checkEngine.SetInvoker(invoker)

var tuples []*base.Tuple

for _, relationship := range relationships {
t, err := tuple.Tuple(relationship)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())
tuples = append(tuples, t)
}

_, err = dataWriter.Write(context.Background(), "t1", database.NewTupleCollection(tuples...), database.NewAttributeCollection())
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

for _, check := range checks {
entity, err := tuple.E(check.entity)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

ear, err := tuple.EAR(check.subject)
Expect(err).ShouldNot(HaveOccurred())

subject := &base.Subject{
Type: ear.GetEntity().GetType(),
Id: ear.GetEntity().GetId(),
Relation: ear.GetRelation(),
}

for permission := range check.assertions {
response, err := invoker.Check(context.Background(), &base.PermissionCheckRequest{
TenantId: "t1",
Entity: entity,
Subject: subject,
Permission: permission,
Metadata: &base.PermissionCheckRequestMetadata{
SnapToken: token.NewNoopToken().Encode().String(),
SchemaVersion: "",
Depth: check.depth,
},
})

Expect(err).Should(HaveOccurred())
Expect(err.Error()).Should(ContainSubstring("ERROR_CODE_DEPTH_NOT_ENOUGH"))
Expect(response.GetCan()).Should(Equal(base.CheckResult_CHECK_RESULT_DENIED))
}
}
})
})
})
6 changes: 4 additions & 2 deletions internal/invoke/invoke.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -166,10 +166,12 @@ func (invoker *DirectInvoker) Check(ctx context.Context, request *base.Permissio
}
}

atomic.AddInt32(&request.GetMetadata().Depth, -1)
// Create a copy of the request to safely decrement depth without mutating the original.
nextRequest := request.CloneVT()
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@wied03 wied03 Jan 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what happens if we do mutate the original?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@ucatbas ucatbas Jan 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the depth is decremented on every deeper call. previously if a lower level had multiple leaves, it ended up decreasing the depth multiple times, when it should have only decreased once

nextRequest.Metadata.Depth = request.GetMetadata().Depth - 1

// Perform the actual permission check using the provided request.
response, err = invoker.cc.Check(ctx, request)
response, err = invoker.cc.Check(ctx, nextRequest)
if err != nil {
span.RecordError(err)
span.SetStatus(otelCodes.Error, err.Error())
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion internal/invoke/utils.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ import (

// checkDepth validates that the request has sufficient depth for permission checks
func checkDepth(request *base.PermissionCheckRequest) error {
if atomic.LoadInt32(&request.GetMetadata().Depth) <= 0 { // Check depth is positive
if atomic.LoadInt32(&request.GetMetadata().Depth) < 0 { // Check depth is not negative
return errors.New(base.ErrorCode_ERROR_CODE_DEPTH_NOT_ENOUGH.String())
}
return nil
Expand Down