Files
EventSnap/e2e/specs/07-adversarial/authorization-deep.spec.ts
fabi bbdfae09a0 chore(e2e): add ESLint + Prettier; fix real findings; dedupe BASE
The Playwright suite had no linter and no formatter — only tsc. Add flat-config ESLint
(typescript-eslint, type-aware) and Prettier (2-space, matching the suite's style).

Rules keep the ones that catch real TEST bugs and drop the noise:
  - no-floating-promises KEPT — an un-awaited request/assertion can let a test end before it runs,
    passing vacuously. It caught one: the SSE reader loop in sse-listener is now explicitly `void`.
  - no-unused-vars KEPT — caught three dead bindings (an unused adminToken fixture arg, an unused
    `api` arg, an unused JPEG_MAGIC import), all removed.
  - no-explicit-any OFF — all test code; `any` is the honest type for an untyped res.json() body or
    a page.evaluate() return.
  - no-empty-pattern OFF — Playwright's dependency-free fixtures are `async ({}, use) => {}`.

Refactor: `const BASE = process.env.E2E_FRONTEND_URL ?? '...'` was redeclared verbatim in 23
files — extracted to helpers/env.ts and imported, so a port/scheme change is one edit not a sweep.

Then `prettier --write`. Verified: eslint clean, tsc clean, prettier clean, desktop suite 210
passed / 1 skipped. (One mobile spec flaked once under retries:0 — a pre-existing cross-test
reflow-timing vector from the flakiness audit, not this change: the each-key edit is stable across
16 isolated runs and a clean full mobile re-run.)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-15 20:45:59 +02:00

193 lines
8.3 KiB
TypeScript

/**
* Phase 2 adversarial — deeper authorization escalation paths.
*
* Complements the foundational 403/401 checks in 05-admin/authorization.spec.ts
* with cross-user and banned-user scenarios that span multiple resources.
*/
import { test, expect } from '../../fixtures/test';
import { seedUpload, seedComment, listComments, findFeedRow } from '../../helpers/seed';
import { BASE } from '../../helpers/env';
test.describe('Adversarial — deep authorization', () => {
// IDOR: user B must not be able to delete user A's REAL comment. This exercises the
// ownership guard (`comment.user_id != auth.user_id` → 403) — the previous version fired
// at the all-zeros UUID, which 404s at the lookup BEFORE that guard runs, so it never
// tested authorization at all.
test("user B cannot delete user A's comment (real resource → 403, comment survives)", async ({
guest,
}) => {
const a = await guest('CommentOwnerA');
const b = await guest('AttackerB');
const uploadId = await seedUpload(a.jwt);
const commentId = await seedComment(a.jwt, uploadId, 'A owns this');
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/comment/${commentId}`, {
method: 'DELETE',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${b.jwt}` },
});
// Must be 403 specifically — the comment exists and is in B's event, so a 404 would
// mean the ownership check was skipped/reordered.
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
// No state change: the comment is still there.
const after = await listComments(a.jwt, uploadId);
expect(after.some((c: any) => c.id === commentId)).toBe(true);
// Control: the real owner CAN delete it (proves the 403 was about identity, not a broken route).
const ownerDel = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/comment/${commentId}`, {
method: 'DELETE',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${a.jwt}` },
});
expect(ownerDel.status).toBe(204);
});
// IDOR: user B must not be able to delete user A's REAL upload.
test("user B cannot delete user A's upload (403, upload survives)", async ({ guest, db }) => {
const a = await guest('UploadOwnerA');
const b = await guest('AttackerB2');
const uploadId = await seedUpload(a.jwt);
expect(await db.countUploadsForUser(a.userId)).toBe(1);
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/upload/${uploadId}`, {
method: 'DELETE',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${b.jwt}` },
});
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
// No state change: A's upload is still present (not soft-deleted).
expect(await db.countUploadsForUser(a.userId)).toBe(1);
});
// IDOR: user B must not be able to edit (re-caption / re-tag) user A's upload.
test("user B cannot edit user A's upload caption (403, caption unchanged)", async ({ guest }) => {
const a = await guest('UploadOwnerA2');
const b = await guest('AttackerB3');
// seedUpload marks compression done, so the upload is feed-visible for the read-back.
const uploadId = await seedUpload(a.jwt, { caption: 'original caption' });
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/upload/${uploadId}`, {
method: 'PATCH',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${b.jwt}`, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
body: JSON.stringify({ caption: 'hacked by B' }),
});
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
// No state change: the caption A set is intact.
const feedRes = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/feed`, {
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${a.jwt}` },
});
const row = findFeedRow(await feedRes.json(), uploadId);
expect(row?.caption).toBe('original caption');
});
// These two fire at a REAL upload, and demand exactly 403.
//
// They used to POST to the all-zeros UUID and accept `[403, 404]`. Both handlers check
// `user.is_banned` BEFORE they look the upload up (social.rs) — so the 404 came from the
// *lookup*, not the guard. Delete the ban check entirely and the request still 404s on the
// nonexistent upload, and both tests still passed. They were the only coverage of
// ban-blocks-like and ban-blocks-comment, and they guarded nothing.
test('banned user cannot toggle a like', async ({ api, host, guest }) => {
const target = await guest('BannedLike');
const uploadId = await seedUpload(host.jwt, { caption: 'likeable' });
await api.banUser(host.jwt, target.userId);
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/upload/${uploadId}/like`, {
method: 'POST',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${target.jwt}` },
});
expect(res.status, 'a banned user must be Forbidden, not merely miss the resource').toBe(403);
});
test('banned user cannot post a comment', async ({ api, host, guest }) => {
const target = await guest('BannedComment');
const uploadId = await seedUpload(host.jwt, { caption: 'commentable' });
await api.banUser(host.jwt, target.userId);
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/upload/${uploadId}/comments`, {
method: 'POST',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${target.jwt}`, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
body: JSON.stringify({ body: 'should be rejected' }),
});
expect(res.status, 'a banned user must be Forbidden, not merely miss the resource').toBe(403);
// ...and nothing was written.
expect(await listComments(host.jwt, uploadId)).toHaveLength(0);
});
test('banned user can still read the feed (read-only access preserved)', async ({
api,
host,
guest,
}) => {
const target = await guest('BannedRead');
await api.banUser(host.jwt, target.userId);
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/feed`, {
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${target.jwt}` },
});
// The journey docs explicitly state banned users keep read access.
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
});
test("host cannot delete another host's session via /api/v1/session", async ({
api,
host,
guest,
}) => {
const otherHost = await guest('OtherHost');
// Promote so they have a host JWT to play with.
await api.setRole(host.jwt, otherHost.userId, 'host');
// The /session DELETE endpoint deletes the caller's own session by token hash.
// A host cannot pass another host's token here (no way to authenticate as them),
// so this is structurally safe — we assert by trying to delete with the wrong
// Authorization header and checking that only the caller's session is gone.
await api.logout(host.jwt);
const stillWorks = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/me/context`, {
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${otherHost.jwt}` },
});
expect(stillWorks.status).toBe(200);
});
// Privilege escalation, tested against REAL targets.
//
// The old version PATCHed the all-zeros UUID and accepted `[400, 403, 404]`. The role whitelist
// rejects "admin" with a 400 before the target is ever looked up — so adding `"admin"` to the
// whitelist would make the request 404 on the nonexistent user instead, which was in the accepted
// list. It never promoted anyone, never targeted *oneself*, and could not detect escalation.
test('a host cannot promote a real guest to admin', async ({ api, host, guest, adminToken }) => {
const victim = await guest('EscalationTarget');
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/host/users/${victim.userId}/role`, {
method: 'PATCH',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${host.jwt}`, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
body: JSON.stringify({ role: 'admin' }),
});
expect(res.status).not.toBe(204);
expect(res.status).not.toBe(200);
// The assertion that actually matters: nobody got promoted.
const users = await api.listUsers(adminToken);
const row = users.find((u: any) => u.id === victim.userId);
expect(row?.role, 'the guest must NOT have become an admin').not.toBe('admin');
});
test('a host cannot promote THEMSELVES to admin', async ({ api, host, adminToken }) => {
const res = await fetch(`${BASE}/api/v1/host/users/${host.userId}/role`, {
method: 'PATCH',
headers: { Authorization: `Bearer ${host.jwt}`, 'Content-Type': 'application/json' },
body: JSON.stringify({ role: 'admin' }),
});
expect(res.status).not.toBe(204);
expect(res.status).not.toBe(200);
const users = await api.listUsers(adminToken);
const me = users.find((u: any) => u.id === host.userId);
expect(me?.role, 'the host must NOT have self-promoted to admin').not.toBe('admin');
});
});