Votes consistent permissions #1724
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dlpzx
force-pushed
the
feat/votes-consistent-permissions
branch
from
08909dd to
a58d873
Compare
dlpzx
force-pushed
the
feat/votes-consistent-permissions
branch
from
a58d873 to
e3ba1e9
Compare
petrkalos
approved these changes
Nov 29, 2024
noah-paige
reviewed
Dec 2, 2024
Comment on lines
+270
to
+274
| disabled={!isAdmin} | ||
| upVoted={isUpVoted} | ||
| onClick={() => upVoteDataset(dataset.datasetUri)} | ||
| upVotes={upVotes} | ||
| /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
does UpVote take in a disabled prop / does this really do anything?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It just shows the number of votes, it allows users to read the upVotes but not to upvote
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pretty sure I was a user who had share access to the dataset and was still able to execute upVote - only being stopped on the server side
…-permissions # Conflicts: # backend/dataall/modules/redshift_datasets/__init__.py
noah-paige
approved these changes
Dec 4, 2024
dlpzx
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 5, 2024
### Feature or Bugfix - Bugfix ### Detail Tests to count votes from #1724 fail because the client2 has no permissions to GET a dataset and cannot upvote it ### Relates - #1724 ### Security Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write `N/A`. Based on [OWASP 10](https://owasp.org/Top10/en/). - Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this includes fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an S3 bucket)? - Is the input sanitized? - What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you consume? - Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries? - Have you ensured no `eval` or similar functions are used? - Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires authorization? - How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms? - Are you logging failed auth attempts? - Are you using or adding any cryptographic features? - Do you use a standard proven implementations? - Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored? - Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users? - Have you used the least-privilege principle? How? By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
dlpzx
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2024
- Feature - Bugfix The Votes submodule is used by Dashboards, Datasets and Redshift_Datasets in the frontend. Although in Dashboards anyone can see and click "upvote" and in the other 2 modules it is restricted to admins of the resource only. In this PR we consolidate one single behavior for Votes: - The UpVote button is visible by all users: any user can get the number of upvotes for a data asset - The UpVote button is visible but disabled for any user except for the resource admin team: only users with access to the resource can vote for it. In this PR we mimic these 2 rules also in the backend: - the upVote API is restricted to users with `GET_X` permissions to the resource - the getVote and countVotes APIs are open to all users - [X] Deployed to AWS - [X] Redshift Dataset owner can upvote a dataset - [X] Programmatically a non-owner receives an error message when executing upvote Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write `N/A`. Based on [OWASP 10](https://owasp.org/Top10/en/). - Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this includes fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an S3 bucket)? - Is the input sanitized? - What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you consume? - Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries? - Have you ensured no `eval` or similar functions are used? - Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires authorization? - How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms? - Are you logging failed auth attempts? - Are you using or adding any cryptographic features? - Do you use a standard proven implementations? - Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored? - Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users? - Have you used the least-privilege principle? How? By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
dlpzx
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 15, 2025
### Feature or Bugfix - Security ### Detail ### 🔐 Security * Update sanitization technique for terms filtering by @noah-paige in #1692 and in #1693 * Move access logging to a separate environment logging bucket by @noah-paige in #1695 * Add explicit token duration config for both JWTs by @noah-paige in #1698 * Disable GraphQL introspection if prod sizing by @noah-paige in #1704 * Add snyk workflow on schedule by @noah-paige in #1705, #1708, #1713, #1745 and in in #1746 * Unify Logger Config for Tasks by @noah-paige in #1709 * Updating overly permissive policies tagged by checkov for environment role using least privilege principles by @mourya-33 in #1632 Data.all permission model has been reviewed to ensure all Mutations and Queries have proper permissions: * Add MANAGE_SHARES permissions by @dlpzx in #1702 * Add permission check - is tenant to update SSM parameters API by @dlpzx in #1714 * Add GET_SHARE_OBJECT permissions to get data filters API by @dlpzx in #1717 * Add permissions on list datasets for env group + cosmetic S3 Datasets by @dlpzx in #1718 * Add GET_WORKSHEET permission in RUN_SQL_QUERY by @dlpzx in #1716 * Add permissions to Quicksight monitoring service layer by @dlpzx in #1715 * Add LIST_ENVIRONMENT_DATASETS permission for listing shared datasets and cleanup unused code by @dlpzx in #1719 * Add is_owner permissions to Glossary mutations + add new integration tests by @dlpzx in #1721 * Refactor env permissions + modify getTrustAccount by @dlpzx in #1712 * Add Feed consistent permissions by @dlpzx in #1722 * Add Votes consistent permissions by @dlpzx in #1724 * Consistent get_<DATA_ASSET> permissions - Dashboards by @dlpzx in #1729 ### 🧪 Test improvements Integration tests are in sync with `main` without 2.7 planned features. In this PR all core modules, optional modules and submodules are tested. That includes: tenant-permissions, omics, mlstudio, votes, notifications and backwards compatiblity of s3 shares. by @SofiaSazonova, @noah-paige , @petrkalos and @dlpzx In addition, the following PR adds functional tests that ensure the permission model of data.all is not corrupted. * ⭐ Add resource permission checks by @petrkalos in #1711 ### Dependencies * Update FastAPI by @petrkalos in #1577 * update fastapi dependency by @noah-paige in #1699 * Upgrade "cross-spawn" to "7.0.5" by @dlpzx in #1701 * Bump python runtime to bump cdk klayers cryptography version by @noah-paige in #1707 ### Relates - List above ### Security Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write `N/A`. Based on [OWASP 10](https://owasp.org/Top10/en/). - Does this PR introduce or modify any input fields or queries - this includes fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an S3 bucket)? - Is the input sanitized? - What precautions are you taking before deserializing the data you consume? - Is injection prevented by parametrizing queries? - Have you ensured no `eval` or similar functions are used? - Does this PR introduce any functionality or component that requires authorization? - How have you ensured it respects the existing AuthN/AuthZ mechanisms? - Are you logging failed auth attempts? - Are you using or adding any cryptographic features? - Do you use a standard proven implementations? - Are the used keys controlled by the customer? Where are they stored? - Are you introducing any new policies/roles/users? - Have you used the least-privilege principle? How? By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. --------- Co-authored-by: mourya-33 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Mourya Darivemula <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Noah Paige <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Petros Kalos <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Sofia Sazonova <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Sofia Sazonova <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Feature or Bugfix
Detail
The Votes submodule is used by Dashboards, Datasets and Redshift_Datasets in the frontend. Although in Dashboards anyone can see and click "upvote" and in the other 2 modules it is restricted to admins of the resource only.
In this PR we consolidate one single behavior for Votes:
In this PR we mimic these 2 rules also in the backend:
GET_Xpermissions to the resourceTesting
Relates
Security
Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write
N/A. Based onOWASP 10.
fetching data from storage outside the application (e.g. a database, an S3 bucket)?
evalor similar functions are used?By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.