Merge branch 'test/admin-login-rate-limit-2026-07-15'

This commit is contained in:
fabi
2026-07-15 19:10:41 +02:00
2 changed files with 97 additions and 15 deletions

View File

@@ -132,6 +132,11 @@ pub async fn patch_config(
"feed_rate_enabled",
"export_rate_enabled",
"join_rate_enabled",
// These two per-area rate toggles are HONOURED by their handlers (auth/handlers.rs reads
// `admin_login_rate_enabled` and `recover_rate_enabled`, both defaulting true) but were
// missing from this allowlist — so the switch existed in code and could never be flipped.
"admin_login_rate_enabled",
"recover_rate_enabled",
"quota_enabled",
"storage_quota_enabled",
"upload_count_quota_enabled",

View File

@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
* tampered signature, expired sessions, wrong role.
*/
import { test, expect } from '../../fixtures/test';
import { ADMIN_PASSWORD } from '../../fixtures/api-client';
const BASE = process.env.E2E_FRONTEND_URL ?? 'http://localhost:3101';
@@ -144,20 +145,96 @@ test.describe('Adversarial — PIN brute-force', () => {
});
test.describe('Adversarial — admin password brute-force', () => {
test('repeated wrong passwords do NOT lock the admin (documented finding)', async () => {
// The admin login handler does not currently implement lockout. This test
// documents the behavior so any future change is intentional.
const attempts = await Promise.all(
Array.from({ length: 10 }, () =>
fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/admin/login`, {
method: 'POST',
headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
body: JSON.stringify({ password: 'wrong-' + Math.random() }),
})
)
);
const statuses = attempts.map((r) => r.status);
expect(statuses.every((s) => s === 401)).toBe(true);
console.warn('[finding] /admin/login has no rate-limit or lockout — bcrypt cost is the only defense.');
// These tests deliberately exhaust the admin-login limiter for the shared test IP. That creates a
// chicken-and-egg for the NEXT test: its truncate auto-fixture must itself call admin_login before
// it can reset the counter — so a still-full window would lock the fixture out with 429 before it
// could clear anything. Disable the toggle here via patchConfig (which authenticates with a JWT,
// NOT the rate-limited admin_login path), so the next login is clear; truncate then wipes the map.
// Runs even if the test body failed, so a failure can't poison the rest of the run.
test.afterEach(async ({ api, adminToken }) => {
await api.patchConfig(adminToken, { admin_login_rate_enabled: 'false' });
});
const tryLogin = (password: string) =>
fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/admin/login`, {
method: 'POST',
headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
body: JSON.stringify({ password }),
});
test('admin login is IP rate-limited: a burst of wrong passwords starts returning 429', async ({
api,
adminToken,
}) => {
// `admin_login` HAS a 5/min/IP throttle (auth/handlers.rs), gated by the master
// `rate_limits_enabled` + `admin_login_rate_enabled`. Both default TRUE in production — but the
// e2e reseed turns the master switch OFF for every test, so this defence ran in ZERO tests.
// (The previous version of this test observed all-401 under that disabled switch and wrongly
// "documented" that no rate limit exists.) Turn it on and prove it.
//
// patchConfig uses the already-minted adminToken (a JWT), so enabling the limiter does not lock
// us out of configuring it.
await api.patchConfig(adminToken, {
rate_limits_enabled: 'true',
admin_login_rate_enabled: 'true',
});
// Sequential, not parallel: the counter increments deterministically so the 429 is not itself
// subject to the counter race the PIN test covers.
const statuses: number[] = [];
for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
statuses.push((await tryLogin('wrong-' + i)).status);
if (statuses[i] === 429) break;
}
// The password path actually ran (budget existed) before the limiter engaged...
expect(statuses[0], 'first attempt should be a normal wrong-password 401, not a spurious 429').toBe(401);
// ...and the limiter DID engage within the window. Delete the throttle and this is never true.
expect(
statuses.some((s) => s === 429),
'a burst of wrong admin passwords from one IP must start being rate-limited (429)'
).toBe(true);
// No wrong password ever authenticated.
expect(statuses.some((s) => s === 200)).toBe(false);
});
test('once throttled, even the CORRECT admin password is refused (it is an IP limit, not a password check)', async ({
api,
adminToken,
}) => {
// This is the assertion that makes the test non-vacuous: it isolates the RATE LIMIT from the
// password logic. If the throttle were removed, the correct password would return 200 here.
await api.patchConfig(adminToken, {
rate_limits_enabled: 'true',
admin_login_rate_enabled: 'true',
});
// Exhaust the window with wrong passwords until throttled.
let throttled = false;
for (let i = 0; i < 10 && !throttled; i++) {
throttled = (await tryLogin('wrong-' + i)).status === 429;
}
expect(throttled, 'the IP should be throttled after a burst').toBe(true);
// The right password, while throttled, must STILL be refused — the limiter is checked before
// the bcrypt verify, so a valid credential does not buy a way around a brute-force lockout.
expect((await tryLogin(ADMIN_PASSWORD)).status, 'a throttled IP is refused even with the correct password').toBe(429);
});
test('the throttle is gated: with the limiter disabled, a burst is NOT rate-limited', async ({
api,
adminToken,
}) => {
// The mirror of the above — proves the toggle actually gates the behaviour (and documents that
// the e2e default really is "off", which is why every OTHER admin test can hammer login freely).
await api.patchConfig(adminToken, {
rate_limits_enabled: 'true',
admin_login_rate_enabled: 'false',
});
const statuses: number[] = [];
for (let i = 0; i < 8; i++) statuses.push((await tryLogin('wrong-' + i)).status);
expect(statuses.every((s) => s === 401), 'with admin_login_rate_enabled=false no attempt should be 429').toBe(true);
});
});