This is merely a small refactoring, aimed to reduce the diff size of #10129.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10141
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: nachtjasmin <nachtjasmin@posteo.de>
Co-committed-by: nachtjasmin <nachtjasmin@posteo.de>
Adds a little hint as to why an LDAP login could fail. See my related comment here: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9546#issuecomment-7853243
I hope this will save the next person running into this a lot of hair pulling 😬
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9807
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Lucas <sclu1034@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: polyfloyd <floyd@polyfloyd.net>
Co-committed-by: polyfloyd <floyd@polyfloyd.net>
Committer names in Slack/Mattermost messages trigger notifications to the corresponding users if they have configured notifications for messages containing their names.
These notifications are intended to alert users when someone else mentions them. However, for Git-related messages, users may receive notifications triggered by their own actions. To prevent this, BitBucket, for example, places names in inline code blocks. This pull request adds a similar feature for the Forgejo Slack webhook.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10147
Reviewed-by: Lucas <sclu1034@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Erki Aring <erki@example.ee>
Co-committed-by: Erki Aring <erki@example.ee>
[CVSS 5.3 Medium](https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4-0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N) -- The `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/dependencies` APIs allow a user to link an issue in one repository as "depending upon" an issue in another repository. Forgejo's implementation had an incorrect permission check which would verify only that the user had write permissions on the issue being modified, and not on the issue it was linking to. Due to the incorrect permission check, it was possible to view limited information (the existence of, and title of) an issue in a private repository that the user does not have access to view. The permission check has been corrected to take into account visibility of the remote repository.
[CVSS 5.3 Medium](https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4-0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N) -- Fetching information about a release via the `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/releases/tag/{tag}` API endpoint did not check whether the release was a draft, allowing accessing to information about a draft release to users who could predict an upcoming release tag but didn't have access to view it. The missing check has been added, returning a 404 response when the release is not published.
[CVSS 6.3 Medium](https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4-0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N) -- Forgejo's web interface allows deleting tags on a git repository through a form post. The endpoint for this form post had misconfigured middleware handlers which enforce security rights, allowing an anonymous user, or a logged-in user without the correct permissions, to delete tags on repositories that they did not own by injecting arbitrary internal tag identifiers into the form. The middleware handler configuration has been corrected.
[CVSS 2.1 Low](https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4-0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N) -- When the head branch of a pull request matches a branch protection rule, the head branch should be able to be merged or rebased only according to the "Push" rules defined in the protection rule. An implementation error checked those branch protection rules in the context of the base repository rather than the head repository, allowing users with write access to the base repository to be considered able to push to the branch, bypassing the "Enable push" option's expected security control.
[CVSS 2.1 Low](https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4-0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N) -- An issue owner can manipulate form inputs to delete the content history of comments they did not create, as long as those comments are on issues that they own. Although comment content is not affected, the history of edits on the comment can be trimmed. The validation in the form handler was corrected.
[CVSS 5.1 Medium](https://www.first.org/cvss/calculator/4-0#CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N) -- When a repository is configured with tag protection rules, it should not be possible for a user that is outside the whitelisted users or teams from modifying the protected tags. An incorrect parameter being passed to a security verification method allowed a user with write access to the repo to delete tags even if they were protected, as long as the tag was originally created by a user who is still authorized by the protection rules.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Security bug fixes
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037): <!--number 10037 --><!--line 0 --><!--description Zml4KGFwaSk6IGZpeCBkZXBlbmRlbmN5IHJlcG8gcGVybXMgaW4gQ3JlYXRlL1JlbW92ZUlzc3VlRGVwZW5kZW5jeQ==-->fix(api): fix dependency repo perms in Create/RemoveIssueDependency<!--description-->
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037): <!--number 10037 --><!--line 1 --><!--description Zml4KGFwaSk6IGRyYWZ0IHJlbGVhc2VzIGNvdWxkIGJlIHJlYWQgYmVmb3JlIGJlaW5nIHB1Ymxpc2hlZA==-->fix(api): draft releases could be read before being published<!--description-->
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037): <!--number 10037 --><!--line 2 --><!--description bWlzY29uZmlndXJlZCBzZWN1cml0eSBjaGVja3Mgb24gdGFnIGRlbGV0ZSB3ZWIgZm9ybQ==-->misconfigured security checks on tag delete web form<!--description-->
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037): <!--number 10037 --><!--line 3 --><!--description aW5jb3JyZWN0IGxvZ2ljIGluICJVcGRhdGUgUFIiIGRpZCBub3QgZW5mb3JjZSBoZWFkIGJyYW5jaCBwcm90ZWN0aW9uIHJ1bGVzIGNvcnJlY3RseQ==-->incorrect logic in "Update PR" did not enforce head branch protection rules correctly<!--description-->
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037): <!--number 10037 --><!--line 4 --><!--description aXNzdWUgb3duZXIgY2FuIGRlbGV0ZSBhbm90aGVyIHVzZXIncyBjb21tZW50J3MgZWRpdCBoaXN0b3J5IG9uIHNhbWUgaXNzdWU=-->issue owner can delete another user's comment's edit history on same issue<!--description-->
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037): <!--number 10037 --><!--line 5 --><!--description dGFnIHByb3RlY3Rpb24gcnVsZXMgY2FuIGJlIGJ5cGFzc2VkIGR1cmluZyB0YWcgZGVsZXRlIG9wZXJhdGlvbg==-->tag protection rules can be bypassed during tag delete operation<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Co-authored-by: Joshua Rogers <MegaManSec@users.noreply.github.com>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10037
Reviewed-by: 0ko <0ko@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
The running of `make test` without any additional options will result in the tampering with of ~/.ssh/authorized_keys. This ensures that the tests use a temporary directory by setting SSH.RootPath consistent with other tests in this codebase.
Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#10164
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10163
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Co-authored-by: Kevin Schoon <me@kevinschoon.com>
Co-committed-by: Kevin Schoon <me@kevinschoon.com>
If, for any reason (e.g. server crash), a task is recorded as done in the database but the logs are still in the database instead of being in storage, they need to be collected.
The log_in_storage field is only set to true after the logs have been transfered to storage and can be relied upon to reflect which tasks have lingering logs.
A cron job collects lingering logs every day, 3000 at a time, sleeping one second between them. In normal circumstances there will be only a few of them, even on a large instance, and there is no need to collect them as quickly as possible.
When there are a lot of them for some reason, garbage collection must happen at a rate that is not too hard on storage I/O.
Refs https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9999
---
Note on backports: the v11 backport is done manually because of minor conflicts. https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10024
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Bug fixes
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10009): <!--number 10009 --><!--line 0 --><!--description Z2FyYmFnZSBjb2xsZWN0IGxpbmdlcmluZyBhY3Rpb25zIGxvZ3M=-->garbage collect lingering actions logs<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10009
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Although #9922 was deployed to Codeberg, it was reported on Matrix that a user observed a `-1` pull request count.
@Gusted checked and verified that the stats stored in redis appeared incorrect, and that no errors occurred on Codeberg that included the repo ID (eg. deadlocks, SQL queries).
```
127.0.0.1:6379> GET Repo:CountPulls:924266
"1"
127.0.0.1:6379> GET Repo:CountPullsClosed:924266
"2"
```
One possible cause is that when `UpdateRepoIssueNumbers` is invoked and invalidates the cache key for the repository, it is currently in a transaction; the next request for that cached count could be computed before the transaction is committed and the update is visible. It's been verified that `UpdateRepoIssueNumbers` is called within a transaction in most interactions (I put a panic in it if `db.InTransaction(ctx)`, and most related tests failed).
This PR fixes that hole by performing the cache invalidation in an `AfterTx()` hook which is invoked after the transaction is committed to the database.
(Another possible cause is documented in #10127)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10130
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Currently `DeriveKey` is called every time that a secret must be encoded/decoded. Since this function is deterministic, its result can be cached to allow a 250x speedup (the original took less than half a microsecond, so this more of a micro-optimization...).
```
go test -bench=.
goos: linux
goarch: amd64
pkg: forgejo.org/modules/keying
cpu: Intel(R) Core(TM) Ultra 5 125H
BenchmarkExpandPRK-18 2071627 564.2 ns/op
BenchmarkExpandPRKOnce-18 541438192 2.206 ns/op
PASS
ok forgejo.org/modules/keying 2.369s
```
## Other changes
- Since the keys can be constructed once, it simplifies a bit the callsites (`keying.TOTP.Encrypt(...)` instead of `keying.DeriveKey(keying.ContextTOTP).Encrypt(...)`)
- All `Encrypt`/`Decrypt` calls will panic forever if called before `Init` has been called (current it panics as long as `Init` has not been called)
- Calling `Init` twice with different keys will trigger a panic (currently racy)
- Calling `Decrypt` with a short ciphertext does not panic anymore (like when calling with long-enough garbage)
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10114
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: oliverpool <git@olivier.pfad.fr>
Co-committed-by: oliverpool <git@olivier.pfad.fr>
Move the function to the repository struct. There is no need to have it as a separate function, move it to the Repository struct. Add extra unit tests.
---
Remove a field from a struct. It has nothing to do with git, it is not the right place to have that field in the git `Tag` struct. Get this value when it's converted to the API struct.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10109
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Fix behaviour change from #10089. Empty inputs used to hit a `continue` statement and skip, and are now fired to a workflow. It isn't likely this is a functional bug, but it does change the behaviour unexpectedly.
Detected by end-to-end test failure (https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/end-to-end/actions/runs/4360/jobs/2/attempt/1):
```
{
- number2: ""
- tags: ""
}
```
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10123
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Previously, when triggering workflows with `workflow_dispatch`, Forgejo only interpreted `on` as boolean `true`. Everything else, including `true`, was treated as `false`. This behaviour does not match the [Forgejo documentation](https://forgejo.org/docs/v13.0/user/actions/reference/#onworkflow_dispatch) that states that `true` and `false` are permitted values. It is also outside the [YAML 1.2 specification of booleans](https://yaml.org/spec/1.2.2/#10212-boolean) that only permits `true` and `false`.
After this change, only `true` and `false` have the desired effect. `on` (converted to `true`) is kept for compatibility reasons to give people time to upgrade.
This problem only affected users of the Forgejo API, because the UI sent the expected values.
Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#10070 by fixing the documentation mismatch.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10089
Reviewed-by: klausfyhn <klausfyhn@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <andreas@ahlenstorf.ch>
Co-committed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <andreas@ahlenstorf.ch>
In forgejo/forgejo!2834 and forgejo/forgejo!5307 it was made so it's no longer possible to modify and delete internal reference, not having this restriction lead to broken pull requests when people used something like `git push --mirror`. However it now still leads to problem with that command as the git client tries to delete such references. We can solve this by using git's `receive.hideRefs` to make this ref read-only and avoid advertising it when someone does `git push --mirror`.
Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#9942
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10015
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Signed-off-by: voltagex <git@voltagex.org>
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [ ] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [x] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [ ] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10035
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: voltagex <git@voltagex.org>
Co-committed-by: voltagex <git@voltagex.org>
A security vulnerability that was fixed in #9840 had the potential to corrupt the `authorized_keys` file that Forgejo is managing to allow ssh access. In the event that it was corrupted, the existing behaviour of Forgejo is to maintain the contents that it finds in the `authorized_keys` file, potentially making an exploit of a Forgejo server persistent despite attempts to rewrite the key file.
This feature adds a new layer of security resiliency in order to prevent persistent ssh key corruption. When Forgejo starts up, if relevant, Forgejo will read the `authorized_keys` file and validate the file's contents. If any keys are found in the file that are not expected, then Forgejo will terminate its startup in order to signal to the server administrator that a critical security risk is present that must be addressed:
```
2025/11/07 10:13:50 modules/ssh/init.go:86:Init() [F] An unexpected ssh public key was discovered. Forgejo will shutdown to require this to be fixed. Fix by either:
Option 1: Delete the file /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys, and Forgejo will recreate it with only expected ssh public keys.
Option 2: Permit unexpected keys by setting [server].SSH_ALLOW_UNEXPECTED_AUTHORIZED_KEYS=true in Forgejo's config file.
Unexpected key on line 1 of /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys
Unexpected key on line 2 of /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys
Unexpected key on line 3 of /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys
Unexpected key on line 4 of /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys
Unexpected key on line 5 of /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys
```
As noted in the log message, the server administrator can address this problem in one of two ways:
- If they delete the file that contains the unexpected keys, Forgejo will regenerate it containing only the expected keys from the Forgejo database.
- If they would like to run their server with ssh keys that are not managed by Forgejo (for example, if they're reusing a `git` ssh user that is accessed through `git@server` and does not invoke Forgejo's ssh handlers), then they can disable the new security check by setting `[server].SSH_ALLOW_UNEXPECTED_AUTHORIZED_KEYS = true` in their `app.ini`.
**This is a breaking change**: the default behaviour is to be restrictive in the contents of `authorized_keys` in order to ensure that server administrators with unexpected keys in `authorized_keys` are aware of those keys.
If `SSH_ALLOW_UNEXPECTED_AUTHORIZED_KEYS=false`, then the behaviour when Forgejo rewrites the `authorized_keys` file is changed to not maintain any unexpected keys in the file. If the value is `true`, then the old behaviour is retained.
The `doctor check` subcommand is updated to use the new validity routines:
```
[4] Check if OpenSSH authorized_keys file is up-to-date
- [E] Unexpected key on line 1 of /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys
- [E] Key in database is not present in /home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys: ...
- [E] authorized_keys file "/home/forgejo/.ssh/authorized_keys" contains validity errors.
Regenerate it with:
"forgejo admin regenerate keys"
or
"forgejo doctor check --run authorized-keys --fix"
ERROR
```
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [x] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- **Documentation updates required**; pending initial reviews of this change.
- [ ] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [ ] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [x] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/10010
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: mfenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-committed-by: mfenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
What previously handled by ifNeedApproval is replaced with
two calls implemented in trust.go:
- getPullRequestCommitAndApproval
when workflows are collected and before runs are generated
from them, figure out if
- they need approval
- they should run from the base or the head
- setRunTrustForPullRequest
when a pull request run is created from a detected workflow,
set the information it will need for trust management
Collecting pull_request_target workflows before the others changes
nothing. They will be first in the list but there is no guarantee or
need for ordering.
This is in preparation of a future commit that needs to know the base
commit before detecting workflows that are not pull_request_target.
- UpdateTrustedWithPullRequest - cancels or approves runs and keep
track of posters that are to always be trusted
- GetPullRequestUserIsTrustedWithActions - logic to determine
if a user is to be implicitly trusted (e.g. the admin of the
instance), explicitly trusted (i.e. it is in the ActionUser table)
or not at all.
- PullRequestCancel & PullRequestApprove will either cancel or approve
all runs of a given pull request.
- RevokeTrust is almost the same as PullRequestCancel
except it operates as if revoking all pull
requests of a given poster, cancelling ongoing jobs. This is
expected to be used when blocking a user.
- AlwaysTrust is almost the same as PullRequestApprove
except it operates as if allways approving all pull requests
of a given poster, switching their jobs to waiting.
- SetRunTrustForPullRequest helper to set the fields of ActionRun
- CleanupActionUser - get rid of unused trust records
CancelRun Cancels all the jobs of a given run.
It is very similar to the less generic web/repo/actions/view.go with
two differences:
- It updates NeedApproval
- The commit status are created within the transaction
It is also very similar to cancelJobsForRun in services/actions/schedule_tasks.go
Keeping those DRY would require a small refactor that does not feel
necessary at this moment.
ApproveRun Approves all the jobs of a given run.
ActionUser is to keep track of pull requests posters that are
permanently trusted. It has a used field to track when it was last
used so records can be expired instead of accumulating forever.
ActionRun has new fields to make it possible to look them up given
either the pull request ID or the poster ID.
There is no functional change, code reorganization or variable names
changes. Two distinct code blocks from the notify function are moved
to the functions:
- getGitRepoAndCommit
- detectWorkflows
The intent is to help with unit testing each of them individually.
All pull request related notifier tests use a similar pattern to
create runs and jobs. Move them to a helper to keep it DRY and cut the
size of the number of lines in the test file by 20%.
Fixes#9911
The endpoint was documented as taking `page` and `limit` parameters but did not actually use then and just returned the full list. Now it does use them!
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9915
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Cyborus <cyborus@cyborus.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Cyborus <cyborus@cyborus.xyz>
This PR is a follow-up to https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/runner/pulls/1117. That PR has to be merged before this one can proceed.
The objective is to allow referencing the `inputs` context in `jobs.<job_id>.runs-on`. That enables users to enter a label in the Forgejo UI during `workflow_dispatch`.
Example:
```yaml
name: test
on:
workflow_dispatch:
inputs:
image:
required: true
type: string
jobs:
test:
runs-on: ${{ inputs.image }}
steps:
- run: echo "Running on ${{ inputs.image }}"
```
Using `inputs` with reusable workflows does not work. I haven't changed `schedule_tasks.go` because the `schedule` trigger does not support `inputs`.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Features
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9950): <!--number 9950 --><!--line 0 --><!--description QWxsb3cgcmVmZXJlbmNpbmcgaW5wdXRzIGluIGpvYnMuPGpvYl9pZD4ucnVucy1vbg==-->Allow referencing inputs in jobs.<job_id>.runs-on<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9950
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <andreas@ahlenstorf.ch>
Co-committed-by: Andreas Ahlenstorf <andreas@ahlenstorf.ch>
instead of code.gitea.io/actions-proto-go
It is a hard fork of code.gitea.io/actions-proto-go which has been used by the runner in the past few months.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9981
Reviewed-by: Michael Kriese <michael.kriese@gmx.de>
Co-authored-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
Co-committed-by: Earl Warren <contact@earl-warren.org>
- Follow up of forgejo/forgejo!5041, forgejo/forgejo!6074, forgejo/forgejo!8692
- The `task` table contains three secrets: clone address (with credentials), auth password and auth token. These secrets are stored for migrating repositories (also the only usage of this table, although it allows for more usages).
- Use `keying` to safely store these secrets and bound them to the table, column, row id and JSON field name.
- The migration isn't spectacular but does closely follow what we learned in the previous two migrations: use a transaction and delete records when you can't decrypt them. We also learned about `db.Iterate` not being happy when updating records but it has since been fixed.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9923
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
- Follow up of forgejo/forgejo!9274
- The test does not call to Gitea for fetching comments, but when initializing the Gitea client it does check the API version and some settings. Mock these responses so this test can be run without a network connection.
- Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#9928
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9948
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Fixes#9846. The number of open action runs on a repo is not precomputed and stored on the repo, but is computed as needed and cached. The computation is faster than the update because it only calculates the smaller set of which action runs are not completed (as opposed to counting all of them).
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9927
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
The `repository` table has quite a few "count of related objects" fields on it, including the number of issues, closed issues, pull requests, and closed pull requests. These fields specifically will cause deadlocks during concurrent PR merges as documented in #9785.
These fields are not used in database queries. In order to eliminate the deadlock possibility on them, I've moved them to be calculated on-demand with caching, with the cache being invalidated in the same places that the recalc used to be triggered.
I've supplemented the already in-place automated testing with manual testing performing simple close & reopen of issues & PRs, and the counts which are used in the tabs at the top of the repo page are updated correctly as expected.
Near future work:
- Similar change can probably be performed to fix#9846
- Last known deadlock identified from #9785; I'm hoping to incorporate the synthetic deadlock test in a near future PR to prevent regressions
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- Tests were already in-place covering these fields; they've been adjusted from using the fields to the new accessor methods.
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
<!--start release-notes-assistant-->
## Release notes
<!--URL:https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo-->
- Bug fixes
- [PR](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9922): <!--number 9922 --><!--line 0 --><!--description cmVkdWNlIGRlYWRsb2NrcyBtZXJnaW5nIFBScyBieSB1c2luZyBjYWNoaW5nIGZvciByZXBvIGlzc3VlIGNvdW50IHN0YXRz-->reduce deadlocks merging PRs by using caching for repo issue count stats<!--description-->
<!--end release-notes-assistant-->
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9922
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
## Checklist
This PR contains both #9889 and #9912, since it depends on the one, and the other provides a test for it.
The exact reasoning behind its logic is described here: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9473#issuecomment-7976186
This PR should return the behaviour back to how it was before a PR to Gitea changed it.
Only the resulting Database-Entry will reference the line blamed commit, now also with the correct adjusted line.
While the context diff view is pulled from the commit the commenter actually commented on.
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [x] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9914
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: BtbN <btbn@btbn.de>
Co-committed-by: BtbN <btbn@btbn.de>
Continuing the pattern from #9868, fixes another deadlock discovered in synthetic testing of #9785. This modifies the `milestone` table to have the `num_issues`, `num_closed_issues`, and `completeness` statistics be calculated asynchronously.
An optional `updateTimestamp` field was added to the stats queue to support the conditional updating of the milestone's modification date, retaining existing functionality.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9916
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
The intent of this change is to reduce the scope of deadlock issues identified in #9785. I've identified other deadlock issues from synthetic testing, so this is not a complete fix, but it's a partial fix. This design was discussed in #9785 and this is the most basic implementation, with a very small scope of work converted to use it.
Introduces a new `forgejo.org/services/stats` module which allows for the queuing and routing of recalc requests for object stats; in this case, the "number of issues" that are assigned to a label, and the number of closed issues that are assigned to a label.
The reasons that these calculations are performed asynchronously through a queue are:
- User operations that are common and performance-sensitive don't have to wait for recalculations that don't need to be exactly up-to-date at all times. For example, merging a pull request will be a faster operation; as it closes an issue, it needs to recalculate `label.num_closed_issues` for every label attached to the PR.
- Database deadlocks that can occur between concurrent operations -- for example, if you were holding a lock on an issue while recalculating a label's count of open issues -- can be broken by making the recalculation occur outside of the transaction.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [x] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
- Internal developer documentation is present.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [ ] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [x] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9868
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
The Gitea API responds with the full number of issue comments, when the `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/comments` endpoint is hit. Originally the number of comments is expected to paginated, so in the end it should always be lower than `MAX_RESPONSE_ITEMS` when the last page is hit.
However, due to the bug, this can never happen and so there will be an infinite loop.
This problem was inherited also into the Forgejo codebase. That means the same problem can occur when migrating from Forgejo to Forgejo.
Some fixes for the Forgejo API have been proposed for the Forgejo codebase see https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/5177 and https://codeberg.org/codeberg/community/issues/1542
An integration test was written which reproduces the exact behaviour. A more future proof solution was created that checks the relevant cases and decides whether the bug is still there or not.
It might be necessary to further distinguish between Gitea downloader and Forgejo downloader if we decide to update the Forgejo API. So we'll probably have to implement functionality and tests directly for the Forgejo downloader instead of just inheriting all the methods.
Co-authored-by: Michael Jerger <michael.jerger@meissa-gmbh.de>
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9274
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: erik <erik_se@posteo.de>
Co-committed-by: erik <erik_se@posteo.de>
Replace the anti-CSRF token with a [cross origin protection by Go](https://go.dev/doc/go1.25#nethttppkgnethttp) that uses a stateless way of verifying if a request was cross origin or not. This allows is to remove al lot of code and replace it with a few lines of code and we no longer have to hand roll this protection. The new protection uses indicators by the browser itself that indicate if the request is cross-origin, thus we no longer have to take care of ensuring the generated CSRF token is passed back to the server any request by the the browser will have send this indicator.
Resolvesforgejo/forgejo#3538
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9830
Reviewed-by: oliverpool <oliverpool@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
Co-committed-by: Gusted <postmaster@gusted.xyz>
**AI Disclosure:** This work was produced with the assistance of an artificial intelligence tool
## feat: Add admin endpoints for individual user email management
Add GET and DELETE endpoints at `/admin/users/{username}/emails` to allow
administrators to list and delete individual email addresses for users.
These API endpoints provide programmatic access to functionality that is
currently only available through the web UI:
- http://forgejo.example/admin/emails (delete individual email addresses)
- http://forgejo.example/admin/users/1 (view individual user's emails)
The new endpoints follow existing admin API naming patterns such as
`/admin/users/{username}/keys`, `/admin/users/{username}/orgs`, and
`/admin/users/{username}/quota`, providing consistent resource management
under the `/admin/users/{username}` namespace.
This complements the existing `/admin/emails` endpoint which lists all emails
across all users, providing administrators with granular control over
individual user email management.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [x] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9594
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Reviewed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mfenniak@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Ryan Lerch <rlerch@redhat.com>
Co-committed-by: Ryan Lerch <rlerch@redhat.com>
As mentioned in https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/8131 and https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/9018:
The github API changed and they now use cursor based pagination. So migration of issues could fail if there were about 10k resources to migrate.
What was done:
* Added a test for reproduction of the bug
* Updated the go-github library to v74
* Update api usage for Reactions
* Added a struct to GithubDownloaderV3 which holds cursorPagination related info
* Updated GetIssues to use cursorPagination
Caveats:
* So far, only listing issues supports the cursor method
* The test requires a valid access token to github as we need to access a repository with **a lot** of issues to test the issue
* We may want to skip this test in the pipeline
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9348
Reviewed-by: Gusted <gusted@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: erik <erik_se@posteo.de>
Co-committed-by: erik <erik_se@posteo.de>
Adds foreign keys to the table pull_request which are covered by the doctor's db consistency check:
- issue_id -> issue
- base_repo_id -> repository
Note that other fields that look like references -- `head_repo_id` and `merger` -- are not covered by the db consistency check and therefore out-of-scope for the first phase of foreign keys. They're on my list for future more detailed evaluation.
In addition to running automated tests (and making a few tweaks to get them to pass), I performed manual testing of:
- Deleting the base repo of a pull request -- the repo is deleted without error and the pull request is deleted as well.
- Deleting the issue behind a PR via an issue delete API call -- this code-path handles deleting a PR correctly.
## Checklist
The [contributor guide](https://forgejo.org/docs/next/contributor/) contains information that will be helpful to first time contributors. There also are a few [conditions for merging Pull Requests in Forgejo repositories](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/PullRequestsAgreement.md). You are also welcome to join the [Forgejo development chatroom](https://matrix.to/#/#forgejo-development:matrix.org).
### Tests
- I added test coverage for Go changes...
- [ ] in their respective `*_test.go` for unit tests.
- [ ] in the `tests/integration` directory if it involves interactions with a live Forgejo server.
- I added test coverage for JavaScript changes...
- [ ] in `web_src/js/*.test.js` if it can be unit tested.
- [ ] in `tests/e2e/*.test.e2e.js` if it requires interactions with a live Forgejo server (see also the [developer guide for JavaScript testing](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/forgejo/tests/e2e/README.md#end-to-end-tests)).
### Documentation
- [ ] I created a pull request [to the documentation](https://codeberg.org/forgejo/docs) to explain to Forgejo users how to use this change.
- [x] I did not document these changes and I do not expect someone else to do it.
### Release notes
- [ ] I do not want this change to show in the release notes.
- [x] I want the title to show in the release notes with a link to this pull request.
- [ ] I want the content of the `release-notes/<pull request number>.md` to be be used for the release notes instead of the title.
Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/pulls/9832
Reviewed-by: Earl Warren <earl-warren@noreply.codeberg.org>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
Co-committed-by: Mathieu Fenniak <mathieu@fenniak.net>
