This sets up a new test class with a simple
test, mostly for increasing coverage. The class
should in the future be extended to properly
verify the handle_feedback() logic.
Previously, when a user updated the config data of an
embedded bot, only the updated fields were dispatched
back to the client. Dispatching all config data fields
makes the client updating code less brittle.
models.py should only contain thin wrapper functions. Furthermore,
this move allows us to remove the circular imports. The two moved
functions are interdependent and are thus moved in one commit.
Creating the very first organization administrator user and
subscribing them to streams before any messages were sent resulted in
RealmAuditLog entries being created with a `event_last_message_id` of
None, because that's the maximum ID in the empty set.
We correct this by fixing the incorrectly created RealmAuditLog
entries, both for new servers and also fixing old broken entries on
existing servers.
This fixes an issue where if a user setup a Zulip server with just the
organization administrator, and then forgot about it (so that the
initial user became soft-deactivated), trying to sign in 3 weeks later
would throw an exception.
This fixes the issue reported here:
https://chat.zulip.org/#narrow/stream/9-issues/subject/500.20error.20on.20login/near/511981
This adds button under "Organization profile" settings, which
deactivates the organization and sends an "event" to all the
active user and log out them.
Fixes: #8212.
This is based on usage in bulk_change_user_names.py, and that
the RealmAuditLog acting_user field is Optional[UserProfile].
This could be more meaningfully changed in future, perhaps to
indicate that the command was run by a specific zulip user.
In order to get test coverage on topic name checks, we
do them in Addressee, so that we don't hit an assertion
first. The assertion in question is in Addressee.topic(),
and it was added partly to appease mypy.
Adds a check for newline that was present on backend, but missing in the
frontend markdown implementation. Updating messages uses is_me_message flag
received from server instead of its own partial test. Similarly, rendering
previews uses markdown code.
Fixes#6493.
This is the first step for allowing users
to edit a bot's service entries, name the
outgoing webhook configuration entries. The
chosen data structures allow for a future
with multiple services per bot; right now,
only one service per bot is supported.
We add two functions:
1.) check_schedule_message(): This function is responsible for
doing the essential initial checkes to verify the validity of
the message. These checkes include things like if user is
allowed to send messages to some stream or not or if the user is
a super_user. All this is basically done by further calling
check_message() with appropriate parameters. This is on the same
lines as is check_send_message().
2.) do_schedule_messages(): This function is responsible for
creating ScheduleMessage table rows for a list of messages that
are to be scheduled. This basically accumulates the ScheduleMessage
objects in a list and then bulk creates the rows.
The original logic is buggy now that emails can belong to (and be
invited to) multiple realms.
The new logic in the `invites` queue worker also avoids the bug where
when the PreregistrationUser was gone by the time the queue worker got
to the invite (e.g., because it'd been revoked), we threw an exception.
[greg: fix upgrade-compatibility logic; add test; explain
revoked-invite race above]
This code changes frequently enough that errors are bound to creep in. The
main change is that this sends the original invitation email instead of the
reminder email, but I think that's fine.
[Modified by greg to (1) keep `USERNAME_FIELD = 'email'`,
(2) silence the corresponding system check, and (3) ban
reusing a system bot's email address, just like we do in
realm creation.]
As we migrate to allow reuse of the same email with multiple realms,
we need to replace the old "no email reuse" validators. Because
stealing the email for a system bot would be problematic, we still ban
doing so.
This commit only affects the realm creation logic, not registering an
account in an existing realm.
We would allow a user with a valid invitation for one realm to use it
on a different realm instead. On a server with multiple realms, an
authorized user of one realm could use this (by sending invites to
other email addresses they control) to create accounts on other
realms. (CVE-2017-0910)
With this commit, when sending an invitation, we record the inviting
user's realm on the PreregistrationUser row; and when registering a
user, we check that the PregistrationUser realm matches the realm the
user is trying to register on. This resolves CVE-2017-0910 for
newly-sent invitations; the next commit completes the fix.
[greg: rewrote commit message]
