Backport #38314 by @lunny
This fixes the web release edit flow so renamed release attachments are
validated against `[repository.release] ALLOWED_TYPES`.
Previously, the API attachment edit endpoint already enforced release
attachment type restrictions, but the web release edit form passed
`attachment-edit-*` values into `release_service.UpdateRelease`, which
updated attachment names directly without validating the new filename
against `setting.Repository.Release.AllowedTypes`.
As a result, a user with repository write access could rename an
existing release attachment to a disallowed extension through the web
UI.
- validate edited release attachment names in
`release_service.UpdateRelease`
- reject forbidden attachment renames using
`setting.Repository.Release.AllowedTypes`
- re-render the web release edit page with a validation error instead of
returning an internal server error
- add regression coverage for both the service layer and the web flow
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
The `Repository` struct in `services/context/repo.go` embedded
`access_model.Permission` anonymously, causing all permission methods to
be promoted directly onto `Repository`. This made it unclear at call
sites whether a method belonged to `Repository` itself or to its
embedded `Permission`.
### Changes
- **`services/context/repo.go`**: Replace anonymous
`access_model.Permission` with named field `Permission
access_model.Permission`
- **49 files** updated to route permission method calls through the
named field:
```go
// Before
ctx.Repo.IsAdmin()
ctx.Repo.CanWrite(unit.TypeCode)
ctx.Repo.CanReadIssuesOrPulls(isPull)
slices.ContainsFunc(unitTypes, ctx.Repo.CanWrite)
// After
ctx.Repo.Permission.IsAdmin()
ctx.Repo.Permission.CanWrite(unit.TypeCode)
ctx.Repo.Permission.CanReadIssuesOrPulls(isPull)
slices.ContainsFunc(unitTypes, ctx.Repo.Permission.CanWrite)
```
Methods defined directly on `*Repository` (`CanWriteToBranch`,
`CanCreateBranch`, etc.) are unchanged.
---------
Co-authored-by: copilot-swe-agent[bot] <198982749+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <2114189+wxiaoguang@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Lunny Xiao <xiaolunwen@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nicolas <bircni@icloud.com>
Found while investigating #33210.
This line no longer makes sense because the form field "TagName" is
required, so this would mean that this code path would never be covered.
Because it isn't covered, we end up going down the "update release"
logic where we eventually set `Release.IsTag` to false (meaning it will
now be treated as a release instead of a tag).
This snapshot rewrites the condition to ensure that we aren't trying to
create a tag that already exists.
---------
Co-authored-by: wxiaoguang <wxiaoguang@gmail.com>
Since `modules/context` has to depend on `models` and many other
packages, it should be moved from `modules/context` to
`services/context` according to design principles. There is no logic
code change on this PR, only move packages.
- Move `code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/context` to
`code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context`
- Move `code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/contexttest` to
`code.gitea.io/gitea/services/contexttest` because of depending on
context
- Move `code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/upload` to
`code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context/upload` because of depending on
context
Just like `models/unittest`, the testing helper functions should be in a
separate package: `contexttest`
And complete the TODO:
> // TODO: move this function to other packages, because it depends on
"models" package
1. The "web" package shouldn't depends on "modules/context" package,
instead, let each "web context" register themselves to the "web"
package.
2. The old Init/Free doesn't make sense, so simplify it
* The ctx in "Init(ctx)" is never used, and shouldn't be used that way
* The "Free" is never called and shouldn't be called because the SSPI
instance is shared
---------
Co-authored-by: Giteabot <teabot@gitea.io>
Fixes#24145
To solve the bug, I added a "computed" `TargetBehind` field to the
`Release` model, which indicates the target branch of a release.
This is particularly useful if the target branch was deleted in the
meantime (or is empty).
I also did a micro-optimization in `calReleaseNumCommitsBehind`. Instead
of checking that a branch exists and then call `GetBranchCommit`, I
immediately call `GetBranchCommit` and handle the `git.ErrNotExist`
error.
This optimization is covered by the added unit test.
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>
* refactor routers directory
* move func used for web and api to common
* make corsHandler a function to prohibit side efects
* rm unused func
Co-authored-by: 6543 <6543@obermui.de>
Giteabot