fix: Master key does not bypass protectedFields on various endpoints#10412
Conversation
|
🚀 Thanks for opening this pull request! We appreciate your effort in improving the project. Please let us know once your pull request is ready for review. Tip
Note Please respond to review comments from AI agents just like you would to comments from a human reviewer. Let the reviewer resolve their own comments, unless they have reviewed and accepted your commit, or agreed with your explanation for why the feedback was incorrect. Caution Pull requests must be written using an AI agent with human supervision. Pull requests written entirely by a human will likely be rejected, because of lower code quality, higher review effort and the higher risk of introducing bugs. Please note that AI review comments on this pull request alone do not satisfy this requirement. Our CI and AI review are safeguards, not development tools. If many issues are flagged, rethink your development approach. Invest more effort in planning and design rather than using review cycles to fix low-quality code. |
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe PR updates session and user refetch logic in routers to conditionally reuse the caller's auth context (including master/maintenance access) instead of always creating a non-master context, and adds tests validating that protected fields are returned when master keys are used. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Warning Review ran into problems🔥 ProblemsGit: Failed to clone repository. Please run the Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## alpha #10412 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 83.99% 84.39% +0.40%
==========================================
Files 192 192
Lines 16749 16749
Branches 229 229
==========================================
+ Hits 14068 14136 +68
+ Misses 2655 2591 -64
+ Partials 26 22 -4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
src/Routers/UsersRouter.js (1)
367-383: Good fix—consider centralizing the refetch-auth fallback.This same privileged-caller-vs-user-auth branch now lives here twice and again in
src/Routers/SessionsRouter.js. Since this regression came from the self-route refetch paths drifting from the regularhandleGetbehavior, keeping it inline in four places makes it easy to reintroduce later.Also applies to: 470-486
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@src/Routers/UsersRouter.js` around lines 367 - 383, Refactor the duplicated privileged-caller vs user-auth refetch logic by extracting it into a single helper (e.g., getRefetchAuth or Auth.getRefetchAuth) and use that helper from UsersRouter (where refetchAuth is built) and SessionsRouter so the same branch (req.auth.isMaster || req.auth.isMaintenance ? req.auth : new Auth.Auth({... with Parse.Object.fromJSON(...)})) is implemented once; update call sites (the code building refetchAuth, and where rest.get is invoked with refetchAuth) to call the new helper with req and the target user object to avoid the inline duplication across routes.spec/ProtectedFields.spec.js (1)
2035-2047: Optional: extract duplicated user setup into a helper.Both new tests repeat the same user creation + phone persistence flow; a tiny helper would reduce repetition and future drift.
♻️ Optional refactor sketch
+ async function createUserWithPhone(username = 'user1') { + const user = await Parse.User.signUp(username, 'password'); + const sessionToken = user.getSessionToken(); + user.set('phone', '555-1234'); + await user.save(null, { sessionToken }); + return user; + } - const user = await Parse.User.signUp('user1', 'password'); - const sessionToken = user.getSessionToken(); - user.set('phone', '555-1234'); - await user.save(null, { sessionToken }); + const user = await createUserWithPhone('user1');Also applies to: 2063-2075
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@spec/ProtectedFields.spec.js` around lines 2035 - 2047, Extract the duplicated user setup (server reconfiguration and user creation/persistence) into a reusable helper function (e.g., createProtectedUser or setupProtectedUser) that calls reconfigureServer with the same protectedFields and protectedFieldsOwnerExempt options, signs up the user via Parse.User.signUp('user1','password'), sets the phone field and saves with the sessionToken (using user.save(null, { sessionToken })), then returns the created user and sessionToken; replace the repeated blocks in the tests (the blocks around Parse.User.signUp and user.save at both locations) with calls to this helper to reduce duplication.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Nitpick comments:
In `@spec/ProtectedFields.spec.js`:
- Around line 2035-2047: Extract the duplicated user setup (server
reconfiguration and user creation/persistence) into a reusable helper function
(e.g., createProtectedUser or setupProtectedUser) that calls reconfigureServer
with the same protectedFields and protectedFieldsOwnerExempt options, signs up
the user via Parse.User.signUp('user1','password'), sets the phone field and
saves with the sessionToken (using user.save(null, { sessionToken })), then
returns the created user and sessionToken; replace the repeated blocks in the
tests (the blocks around Parse.User.signUp and user.save at both locations) with
calls to this helper to reduce duplication.
In `@src/Routers/UsersRouter.js`:
- Around line 367-383: Refactor the duplicated privileged-caller vs user-auth
refetch logic by extracting it into a single helper (e.g., getRefetchAuth or
Auth.getRefetchAuth) and use that helper from UsersRouter (where refetchAuth is
built) and SessionsRouter so the same branch (req.auth.isMaster ||
req.auth.isMaintenance ? req.auth : new Auth.Auth({... with
Parse.Object.fromJSON(...)})) is implemented once; update call sites (the code
building refetchAuth, and where rest.get is invoked with refetchAuth) to call
the new helper with req and the target user object to avoid the inline
duplication across routes.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 83786319-f641-4855-af44-8742ccddd534
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
spec/ProtectedFields.spec.jsspec/vulnerabilities.spec.jssrc/Routers/SessionsRouter.jssrc/Routers/UsersRouter.js
# [9.8.0-alpha.10](9.8.0-alpha.9...9.8.0-alpha.10) (2026-04-07) ### Bug Fixes * Master key does not bypass `protectedFields` on various endpoints ([#10412](#10412)) ([c0889c8](c0889c8))
|
🎉 This change has been released in version 9.8.0-alpha.10 |
2 participants
Pull Request
Issue
Master key does not bypass
protectedFieldson/login,/verifyPassword,/sessions/me, and/upgradeToRevocableSessionTasks
Summary by CodeRabbit
Bug Fixes
Tests