Skip to content
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.

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

[Bugfix] | GH-1749 -Fixing share expiration task #1750

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

TejasRGitHub
Copy link
Contributor

@TejasRGitHub TejasRGitHub commented Jan 10, 2025

Feature or Bugfix

  • Bugfix

Detail

  • Simplified the logic for share item state transition
  • Resolved bug by adding

Relates

Testing

  1. Created a share with expiration and all the share items are in Revoke_Succeded state. After running share exp task, no error were thrown ✅
  2. Created a share with expiration and few shares are in Share_Succeeded and few are in Revoke_Succeded state. After running share expiration task, share succeeded items were revoked successfully. ✅
  3. Share with expiration and items in Revoke_succeeded and few in revoke_failed, submitted, then share exp task doesn't process those items and doesn't throw any error ✅

Security

Please answer the questions below briefly where applicable, or write N/A. Based on
OWASP 10.

  • 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.

@TejasRGitHub TejasRGitHub marked this pull request as ready for review January 10, 2025 21:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant