### Background
When SSRF detection fails, the exception bubbles all the way up, causing a log alert. This isn't actionable, and should instead be ignored. The existing `rescue` does already ignore network errors, but fails to account for SSRF exceptions coming from `FinalDestination`.
### What is this change?
This PR does two things.
---
Firstly, it introduces a common root exception class, `FinalDestination::SSRFError` for SSRF errors. This serves two functions: 1) it makes it easier to rescue both errors at once, which is generally what one wants to do and 2) prevents having to dig deep into the class hierarchy for the constant.
This change is fully backwards compatible thanks to how inheritance and exception handling works.
---
Secondly, it rescues this new exception in `UserAvatar.import_url_for_user`, which is causing sporadic errors to be logged in production. After this SSRF errors are handled the same as network errors.
After this change, in order to join a chat channel, a user needs to be in a group with at least “Reply” permission for the category. If the user only has “See” permission, they are able to preview the channel, but not join it or send messages. The auto-join function also follows this new restriction.
---------
Co-authored-by: Martin Brennan <martin@discourse.org>
A category's slug can be encoded when
`SiteSetting.slug_generation_method` has been set to "encoded". As a
result, we have to support non ASCII characters as well.
This commit adds support for excluding categories when using the
`category:` filter with the `-` prefix. For example,
`-category:category-slug` will exclude all topics that belong to the
category with slug "category-slug" and all of its sub-categories.
To only exclude a particular category and not all of its sub-categories,
the `-` prefix can be used with the `=` prefix. For example,
`-=category:category-slug` will only exclude topics that belong to the
category with slug "category-slug". Topics in the sub-categories of
"category-slug" will still be included.
Specifying more than two tag names when using the `tag:` filter was not
working because of a bug in the code where only the first two value in
the `tag:` filter was being selected.
What is the problem?
Consider the following timeline:
1. OP starts a topic.
2. Troll responds snarkily.
3. Flagger flags the post as “inappropriate”.
4. Admin agrees and hides the post.
5. Troll ninja-edits the post within the grace period, but still snarky.
6. Flagger flags the post as inappropriate again.
The current behaviour is that the flagger is met with an error saying the post has been reviewed and can't be flagged again for the same reason.
The desired behaviour is after someone has edited a post, it should be flaggable again.
Why is this happening?
This is related to the ninja-edit feature, where within a set grace period no new revision is created, but a new revision is required to flag the same post for the same reason.
So essentially there is a window between the naughty corner cooldown where a flagged post can't be edited, and the ninja-edit grace period, where an edit can be made without a new revision. Posts that are edited within this window can't be re-flagged by the same user.
|-----------------|-------------------------------|
^ Flag accepted | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 🥷🏻 ~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
| ^ Editing grace period over
^ Naughty corner cooldown over
How does this fix it?
We already create a new revision when ninja-editing a post with a pending flag. The issue above happens only in the case where the flag is already accepted.
This change extends the existing behaviour so that a new revision is created when ninja-editing any flagged post, regardless of the status of the flag. (Deleted flags excluded.)
This should also help with posterity, avoiding situations where a successfully flagged post looks innocuous in the history because it was ninja-edited, and vice versa.
This header is used by Microsoft Exchange to indicate when certain types of
autoresponses should not be generated for an email.
It triggers our "is this mail autogenerated?" detection, but should not be used
for this purpose.
Clearing modifiers during a plugin spec run will affect all future specs. Instead, this commit introduces a more surgical `.unregister_modifier` API which plugins can use if they need to add/remove a modifier during a specific spec.
`TopicQuery#latest_results` which was being used by
`TopicQuery#list_filter` defaults to ordering by `Topic#bumped_at` in
descending order and that was taking precedent over the order scopes
being applied by `TopicsFilter`.
This allows multiple ordering to be specified by using a comma seperated string.
For example, `order:created,views` would order the topics by
`Topic#created_at` and then `Topic#views.
An older change about optimising images caused the selector that adds lightboxing not to apply on quoted images. This fixes that. The selector is now not applicable as optimisation occurs in a separate place.
This change allows quoted images to be opened in a lightbox.
This new modifier can be used by plugins to modify search ordering.
Specifically plugins such as discourse_solved can amend search ordering
so solved topics bump to the top.
Also correct edge case where low and high sort priority categories did not
order correctly when it came to closed/archived
This commit adds support for the following ordering filters:
1. `order:activity` which orders the topics by `Topic#bumped_at` in descending order
2. `order:activity-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#bumped_at` in ascending order
3. `order:latest-post` which orders the topics by `Topic#last_posted_at` in descending order
4. `order:latest-post-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#last_posted_at` in ascending order
5. `order:created` which orders the topics by `Topic#created_at` in descending order
6. `order:created-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#created_at` in ascending order
7. `order:views` which orders the topics by `Topic#views` in descending order
8. `order:views-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#views` in ascending order
9. `order:likes` which orders the topics by `Topic#likes` in descending order
10. `order:likes-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#likes` in ascending order
11. `order:likes-op` which orders the topics by `Post#like_count` of the first post in the topic in descending order
12. `order:likes-op-asc` which orders the topics by `Post#like_count` of the first post in the topic in ascending order
13. `order:posters` which orders the topics by `Topic#participant_count` in descending order
14. `order:posters-asc` which orders the topics by `Topic#participant_count` in ascending order
15. `order:category` which orders the topics by `Category#name` of the topic's category in descending order
16. `order:category-asc` which orders the topics by `Category#name` of the topic's category in ascending order
Multiple order filters can be composed together and the order of ordering is applied based on the position of the filter
in the query string. For example, `order:views order:created` will order the topics by `Topic#views` in descending order
and then order the topics by `Topics#created_at` in descending order.
This commit adds support for the following date filters:
1. `activity-before:<YYYY-MM-DD>` which filters for topics that have been bumped at or before given date
2. `activity-after:<YYYY-MM-DD>` which filters for topics that have been bumped at or after given date
3. `created-before:<YYYY-MM-DD>` which filters for topics that have been created at or before given date
4. `created-after:<YYYY-MM-DD>` which filters for topics that have been created at or after given date
5. `latest-post-before:<YYYY-MM-DD>` which filters for topics with the
latest post posted at or before given date
6. `latest-post-after:<YYYY-MM-DD>` which filters for topics with the
latest post posted at or after given date
If the filter has an invalid value, i.e string that cannot be converted
into a proper date in the `YYYY-MM-DD` format, the filter will be ignored.
If either of each filter is specify multiple times, only the last
occurrence of each filter will be taken into consideration.
Large or broken images are removed from oneboxes, but sometimes images
were removed when they were oneboxed too. The reason is that images can
be oneboxed by the AllowlistedGenericOnebox or ImageOnebox and only
AllowlistedGenericOnebox was handled correctly.
- Move the old '`define_include_method`' arg to a `respect_plugin_enabled` kwarg
- Introduce an `include_condition` kwarg which can be passed a lambda with inclusion logic. Lambda will be run via `instance_exec` in the context of the serializer instance
This is backwards compatible - old-style invocations will trigger a deprecation message
- Move the old '`define_include_method`' arg to a `respect_plugin_enabled` kwarg
- Introduce an `include_condition` kwarg which can be passed a lambda with inclusion logic. Lambda will be run via `instance_exec` in the context of the serializer instance
This is backwards compatible - old-style invocations will trigger a deprecation message
Update chat and poll plugins to new pattern
By default, the Sprockets DirectiveProcessor introduces a newline between possible 'header' comments and the rest of the JS file. This causes sourcemaps to be offset by 1 line, and therefore breaks browser tooling. We know that Ember-Cli assets do not use Sprockets directives, so we can totally bypass the DirectiveProcessor for those files.
We're using v3 of Sprockets, which is no longer supported - upstreaming a fix will be difficult. Long term, we intend to move away from sprockets.
This PR adds the ability to destroy reviewables for a passed user via the API. This was not possible before as this action was reserved for reviewables for you created only.
If a user is an admin and calls the `#destroy` action from the API they are able to destroy a reviewable for a passed user. A user can be targeted by passed either their:
- username
- external_id (for SSO)
to the request.
In the case you attempt to destroy a non-personal reviewable and
- You are not an admin
- You do not access the `#destroy` action via the API
you will raise a `Discourse::InvalidAccess` (403) and will not succeed in destroying the reviewable.
Responding to negative behaviour tends to solicit more of the same. Common wisdom states: "don't feed the trolls".
This change codifies that advice by introducing a new nudge when hitting the reply button on a flagged post. It will be shown if either the current user, or two other users (configurable via a site setting) have flagged the post.
This is to help generate random channels and chat
messages for local dev. This was removed in 12a18d4d55
presumably because it was not worth refactoring at the
time.
I've only added these tasks:
- `rake chat:message:populate\[113,20\]` (channel_id, count)
- Generates the count of messages for a channel ID provided,
otherwise uses a random channel and 200 count.
- `rake chat:category_channel:populate`
- Creates a chat channel for a random category.
- `rake chat🧵populate\[132,5\]` (channel_id, message_count)
- Creates a thread with N messages in the specified channel,
and enables threading in that channel if necessary
It switches to a different command for detecting the current git branch because the old command always returned HEAD as branch when the git repository is on a detached head (e.g. tag). The new command doesn't return a branch when the repository is on a detached head, which allows us to fall back to the `version` variable that is stored in the git config since https://github.com/discourse/discourse_docker/pull/707. It contains the value of the `version` from `app.yml`.
It also includes a small change to specs, because our tests usually run on specific commits instead of a branch or tag, so Discourse.git_branch always returns "unknown". We can use the "unknown" branch for tests, so it makes sense to ignore it only in other envs.
This fixes a 500 error that occurs when adding a tag to a category's
restricted tag list if the category's restricted tags already included a
synonym tag.
