Change all license headers to comply with REUSE specification.
Fix#16132
Co-authored-by: flynnnnnnnnnn <flynnnnnnnnnn@github>
Co-authored-by: John Olheiser <john.olheiser@gmail.com>
_This is a different approach to #20267, I took the liberty of adapting
some parts, see below_
## Context
In some cases, a weebhook endpoint requires some kind of authentication.
The usual way is by sending a static `Authorization` header, with a
given token. For instance:
- Matrix expects a `Bearer <token>` (already implemented, by storing the
header cleartext in the metadata - which is buggy on retry #19872)
- TeamCity #18667
- Gitea instances #20267
- SourceHut https://man.sr.ht/graphql.md#authentication-strategies (this
is my actual personal need :)
## Proposed solution
Add a dedicated encrypt column to the webhook table (instead of storing
it as meta as proposed in #20267), so that it gets available for all
present and future hook types (especially the custom ones #19307).
This would also solve the buggy matrix retry #19872.
As a first step, I would recommend focusing on the backend logic and
improve the frontend at a later stage. For now the UI is a simple
`Authorization` field (which could be later customized with `Bearer` and
`Basic` switches):
![2022-08-23-142911](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3864879/186162483-5b721504-eef5-4932-812e-eb96a68494cc.png)
The header name is hard-coded, since I couldn't fine any usecase
justifying otherwise.
## Questions
- What do you think of this approach? @justusbunsi @Gusted @silverwind
- ~~How are the migrations generated? Do I have to manually create a new
file, or is there a command for that?~~
- ~~I started adding it to the API: should I complete it or should I
drop it? (I don't know how much the API is actually used)~~
## Done as well:
- add a migration for the existing matrix webhooks and remove the
`Authorization` logic there
_Closes #19872_
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <williamzijl7@hotmail.com>
Co-authored-by: delvh <dev.lh@web.de>
The OAuth spec [defines two types of
client](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749#section-2.1),
confidential and public. Previously Gitea assumed all clients to be
confidential.
> OAuth defines two client types, based on their ability to authenticate
securely with the authorization server (i.e., ability to
> maintain the confidentiality of their client credentials):
>
> confidential
> Clients capable of maintaining the confidentiality of their
credentials (e.g., client implemented on a secure server with
> restricted access to the client credentials), or capable of secure
client authentication using other means.
>
> **public
> Clients incapable of maintaining the confidentiality of their
credentials (e.g., clients executing on the device used by the resource
owner, such as an installed native application or a web browser-based
application), and incapable of secure client authentication via any
other means.**
>
> The client type designation is based on the authorization server's
definition of secure authentication and its acceptable exposure levels
of client credentials. The authorization server SHOULD NOT make
assumptions about the client type.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8252#section-8.4
> Authorization servers MUST record the client type in the client
registration details in order to identify and process requests
accordingly.
Require PKCE for public clients:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8252#section-8.1
> Authorization servers SHOULD reject authorization requests from native
apps that don't use PKCE by returning an error message
Fixes#21299
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
This adds an api endpoint `/files` to PRs that allows to get a list of changed files.
built upon #18228, reviews there are included
closes https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/654
Co-authored-by: Anton Bracke <anton@ju60.de>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
* Move access and repo permission to models/perm/access
* fix test
* fix git test
* Move functions sequence
* Some improvements per @KN4CK3R and @delvh
* Move issues related code to models/issues
* Move some issues related sub package
* Merge
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Rename some files
* Move access and repo permission to models/perm/access
* fix test
* Move some git related files into sub package models/git
* Fix build
* fix git test
* move lfs to sub package
* move more git related functions to models/git
* Move functions sequence
* Some improvements per @KN4CK3R and @delvh
Adds a feature [like GitHub has](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/proposing-changes-to-your-work-with-pull-requests/creating-a-pull-request-from-a-fork) (step 7).
If you create a new PR from a forked repo, you can select (and change later, but only if you are the PR creator/poster) the "Allow edits from maintainers" option.
Then users with write access to the base branch get more permissions on this branch:
* use the update pull request button
* push directly from the command line (`git push`)
* edit/delete/upload files via web UI
* use related API endpoints
You can't merge PRs to this branch with this enabled, you'll need "full" code write permissions.
This feature has a pretty big impact on the permission system. I might forgot changing some things or didn't find security vulnerabilities. In this case, please leave a review or comment on this PR.
Closes#17728
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
* Team permission allow different unit has different permission
* Finish the interface and the logic
* Fix lint
* Fix translation
* align center for table cell content
* Fix fixture
* merge
* Fix test
* Add deprecated
* Improve code
* Add tooltip
* Fix swagger
* Fix newline
* Fix tests
* Fix tests
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Max permission of external wiki and issues should be read
* Move team units with limited max level below units table
* Update label and column names
* Some improvements
* Fix lint
* Some improvements
* Fix template variables
* Add permission docs
* improve doc
* Fix fixture
* Fix bug
* Fix some bug
* fix
* gofumpt
* Integration test for migration (#18124)
integrations: basic test for Gitea {dump,restore}-repo
This is a first step for integration testing of DumpRepository and
RestoreRepository. It:
runs a Gitea server,
dumps a repo via DumpRepository to the filesystem,
restores the repo via RestoreRepository from the filesystem,
dumps the restored repository to the filesystem,
compares the first and second dump and expects them to be identical
The verification is trivial and the goal is to add more tests for each
topic of the dump.
Signed-off-by: Loïc Dachary <loic@dachary.org>
* Team permission allow different unit has different permission
* Finish the interface and the logic
* Fix lint
* Fix translation
* align center for table cell content
* Fix fixture
* merge
* Fix test
* Add deprecated
* Improve code
* Add tooltip
* Fix swagger
* Fix newline
* Fix tests
* Fix tests
* Fix test
* Fix test
* Max permission of external wiki and issues should be read
* Move team units with limited max level below units table
* Update label and column names
* Some improvements
* Fix lint
* Some improvements
* Fix template variables
* Add permission docs
* improve doc
* Fix fixture
* Fix bug
* Fix some bug
* Fix bug
Co-authored-by: Lauris BH <lauris@nix.lv>
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Co-authored-by: Aravinth Manivannan <realaravinth@batsense.net>
* Move keys to models/keys
* Rename models/keys -> models/asymkey
* change the missed package name
* Fix package alias
* Fix test
* Fix docs
* Fix test
* Fix test
* merge
* Some refactors related repository model
* Move more methods out of repository
* Move repository into models/repo
* Fix test
* Fix test
* some improvements
* Remove unnecessary function
* Use a standalone struct name for Organization
* recover unnecessary change
* make the code readable
* Fix template failure
* Fix template failure
* Move HasMemberWithUserID to org
* Fix test
* Remove unnecessary user type check
* Fix test
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Fixes#16381
Note that changes to unprotected files via the web editor still cannot be pushed directly to the protected branch. I could easily add such support for edits and deletes if needed. But for adding, uploading or renaming unprotected files, it is not trivial.
* Extract & Move GetAffectedFiles to modules/git
* Add option to provide signed token to verify key ownership
Currently we will only allow a key to be matched to a user if it matches
an activated email address. This PR provides a different mechanism - if
the user provides a signature for automatically generated token (based
on the timestamp, user creation time, user ID, username and primary
email.
* Ensure verified keys can act for all active emails for the user
* Add code to mark keys as verified
* Slight UI adjustments
* Slight UI adjustments 2
* Simplify signature verification slightly
* fix postgres test
* add api routes
* handle swapped primary-keys
* Verify the no-reply address for verified keys
* Only add email addresses that are activated to keys
* Fix committer shortcut properly
* Restructure gpg_keys.go
* Use common Verification Token code
Signed-off-by: Andrew Thornton <art27@cantab.net>
* remove github.com/unknwon/com from models
* dont use "com.ToStr()"
* replace "com.ToStr" with "fmt.Sprint" where its easy to do
* more refactor
* fix test
* just "proxy" Copy func for now
* as per @lunny
* move GitCommit to APIFormat convertion into convert package
* rename Commit convert functions
* move stopwatch to api convertion into convert package & rm unused code & extend test
* fix compare time
* Gitea not Gogs ;)
* git blame tells me a lot of gitea things happen here around 2018, add header
* move user code int its own file
* expose user id
* adopt things from APIFormat
* fix test
* CI.restart()