This patch is a followup of
https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/21504 where limits on custom
message for an invite were introduced.
This had a side effect of making some existing invites invalid and with
the current code, they can’t be invalidated anymore.
This patch takes the approach of skipping the validations when invites
are invalidated since the important thing here is to mark the invite as
invalidated regardless of its actual state in the DB. (no other
attributes are updated at the same time anyway)
Follow up to 40e8912395
In this previous commit I introduced a bug that prevented
a legitimate case for an existing user to redeem an invite,
where the email/domain were both blank and the invite was
still redeemable by the user. Fixes the issue and adds more
specs for that case.
This security fix affects sites which have `SiteSetting.must_approve_users`
enabled. There are intentional and unintentional cases where invited
users can be auto approved and are deemed to have skipped the staff approval process.
Instead of trying to reason about when auto-approval should happen, we have decided that
enabling the `must_approve_users` setting going forward will just mean that all new users
must be explicitly approved by a staff user in the review queue. The only case where users are auto
approved is when the `auto_approve_email_domains` site setting is used.
Co-authored-by: Alan Guo Xiang Tan <gxtan1990@gmail.com>
It's very easy to forget to add `require 'rails_helper'` at the top of every core/plugin spec file, and omissions can cause some very confusing/sporadic errors.
By setting this flag in `.rspec`, we can remove the need for `require 'rails_helper'` entirely.
This can happen if the topic to which a user is invited is in a private
category and the user was not invited to one of the groups that can see
that specific category.
This used to be a warning and this commit makes it an error.
* FIX: Mark invites flash messages as HTML safe.
This change should be safe as all user inputs included in the errors are sanitized before sending it back to the client.
Context: https://meta.discourse.org/t/html-tags-are-explicit-after-latest-update/214220
* If somebody adds a new error message that includes user input and doesn't sanitize it, using html-safe suddenly becomes unsafe again. As an extra layer of protection, we make the client sanitize the error message received from the backend.
* Escape user input instead of sanitizing
Users can invite people to topics from secured category, but they will
not be redirected to the topic after signing up unless they have the
permissions to view the topic. This commit shows a warning when invite
is saved if the topic is in a secured category and none of the invite
groups are allowed to see it.
When invited by email, users will receive an invite URL which contains
a token. If that token is present when the invite is redeemed, their
account will be automatically activated.
Admins can use bulk invites to pre-populate user fields. The imported
CSV file must have a header with "email" column (first position) and
names of the user fields (exact match).
Under the hood, the bulk invite will create staged users and populate
the user fields of those.
This PR allows invitations to be used when the DiscourseConnect SSO is enabled for a site (`enable_discourse_connect`) and local logins are disabled. Previously invites could not be accepted with SSO enabled simply because we did not have the code paths to handle that logic.
The invitation methods that are supported include:
* Inviting people to groups via email address
* Inviting people to topics via email address
* Using invitation links generated by the Invite Users UI in the /my/invited/pending route
The flow works like this:
1. User visits an invite URL
2. The normal invitation validations (redemptions/expiry) happen at that point
3. We store the invite key in a secure session
4. The user clicks "Accept Invitation and Continue" (see below)
5. The user is redirected to /session/sso then to the SSO provider URL then back to /session/sso_login
6. We retrieve the invite based on the invite key in secure session. We revalidate the invitation. We show an error to the user if it is not valid. An additional check here for invites with an email specified is to check the SSO email matches the invite email
7. If the invite is OK we create the user via the normal SSO methods
8. We redeem the invite and activate the user. We clear the invite key in secure session.
9. If the invite had a topic we redirect the user there, otherwise we redirect to /
Note that we decided for SSO-based invites the `must_approve_users` site setting is ignored, because the invite is a form of pre-approval, and because regular non-staff users cannot send out email invites or generally invite to the forum in this case.
Also deletes some group invite checks as per https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/12353
* FIX: Do not show expired invites under Pending tab
* DEV: Controller action was renamed in previous commit
* FEATURE: Add 'Expired' tab to invites
* FEATURE: Refresh model after removing expired invites
* FEATURE: Do not immediately add invite to the list
Opening the 'create-invite' modal used to automatically generate an
invite to reserve an invite link. If the user did not save it and
closed the modal, the invite would be destroyed. This operations caused
the invite list to change in the background and confuse users.
* FEATURE: Sort redeemed users by creation time
* UX: Improve show / hide advanced options link
* FIX: Show redeemed users even if invites were trashed
* UX: Change modal title when editing invite
* UX: Remove Get Link button
Users can get it from the edit modal
* FEATURE: Add limit for invite links generated by regular users
* FEATURE: Add option to skip email
* UX: Show better error messages
* FIX: Show "Invited by" even if invite was trashed
Follow up to 1fdfa13a099d8e46edd0c481b3aaaafe40455ced.
* FEATURE: Add button to save without sending email
Follow up to c86379a465f28a3cc64a4a8c939cf32cf2931659.
* DEV: Use a buffer to hold all changed data
* FEATURE: Close modal after save
* FEATURE: Rate limit resend invite email
* FEATURE: Make the save buttons smarter
* FEATURE: Do not always send email even for new invites
The user interface has been reorganized to show email and link invites
in the same screen. Staff has more control over creating and updating
invites. Bulk invite has also been improved with better explanations.
On the server side, many code paths for email and link invites have
been merged to avoid duplicated logic. The API returns better responses
with more appropriate HTTP status codes.
The 'Discourse SSO' protocol is being rebranded to DiscourseConnect. This should help to reduce confusion when 'SSO' is used in the generic sense.
This commit aims to:
- Rename `sso_` site settings. DiscourseConnect specific ones are prefixed `discourse_connect_`. Generic settings are prefixed `auth_`
- Add (server-side-only) backwards compatibility for the old setting names, with deprecation notices
- Copy `site_settings` database records to the new names
- Rename relevant translation keys
- Update relevant translations
This commit does **not** aim to:
- Rename any Ruby classes or methods. This might be done in a future commit
- Change any URLs. This would break existing integrations
- Make any changes to the protocol. This would break existing integrations
- Change any functionality. Further normalization across DiscourseConnect and other auth methods will be done separately
The risks are:
- There is no backwards compatibility for site settings on the client-side. Accessing auth-related site settings in Javascript is fairly rare, and an error on the client side would not be security-critical.
- If a plugin is monkey-patching parts of the auth process, changes to locale keys could cause broken error messages. This should also be unlikely. The old site setting names remain functional, so security-related overrides will remain working.
A follow-up commit will be made with a post-deploy migration to delete the old `site_settings` rows.
A more general, lower-level change in addition to #11950.
Most code paths already check if SSO is enabled or if local logins are disabled before trying to create an email invite.
This is a safety net to ensure no invalid invites sneak by.
Also includes:
FIX: Don't allow to bulk invite when SSO is on (or when local logins are disabled)
This mirrors can_invite_to_forum? and other email invite code paths.
Resending an invite moved the expire date in the future, but did not
invalidate it. For example, if an invite was sent to an email,
invalidated and then resent, it would still be left invalidated.
DEV: deprecate `invite.via_email` in favor of `invite.emailed_status`
This commit adds a new column `emailed_status` in `invites` table for
tracking email sending status.
0 - not required
1 - pending
2 - bulk pending
3 - sending
4 - sent
For normal email invites, invite record is created with emailed_status
set to 'pending'.
When bulk invites are sent invite record is created with emailed_status
set to 'bulk pending'.
For invites that generates link, invite record is created with
emailed_status set to 'not required'.
When invite email is in queue emailed_status is updated to 'sending'
Once the email is sent via `InviteEmail` job the invite emailed_status
is updated to 'sent'.
There was a race condition when 2 invites existed for 1 user where in some
cases data from both invites would be used for the redeem. Depending on DB
ordering.
Fix is to delete duplicate invites earlier in the process prior to
`redeem_from_email` being called.
* Introduced fab!, a helper that creates database state for a group
It's almost identical to let_it_be, except:
1. It creates a new object for each test by default,
2. You can disable it using PREFABRICATION=0
This change both speeds up specs (less strings to allocate) and helps catch
cases where methods in Discourse are mutating inputs.
Overall we will be migrating everything to use #frozen_string_literal: true
it will take a while, but this is the first and safest move in this direction
Do not send an activation email to users invited via email. They
already confirmed their email address by clicking the invite link.
Users invited via link will need to confirm their email address before
they can login.
