Skip to content

fix(security): authenticate artifact token before object lookup - #349

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
fix/artifact-token-precondition-main-20260811
Open

fix(security): authenticate artifact token before object lookup#349
seonghobae wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
fix/artifact-token-precondition-main-20260811

Conversation

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Objective

Remove a public artifact-route existence-oracle boundary: missing or unsupported artifact credentials must be rejected before conversion-job or artifact-store lookup.

Test-first state

This Draft is intentionally RED at test-only head 466c7dd8d9b45b8423c0097cc7c06f1305fe3db0. Focused tests require missing credentials and unsupported Authorization schemes to return 401 before any interaction with DocumentConversionService, ArtifactStore, or ArtifactLinkService. Protected main currently queries job state first, so the regression is expected to fail.

Scope

Controller-only precondition plus focused regression. This does not edit ArtifactLinkService, which is owned by active PR #276, and does not claim to solve malformed-but-present token parsing before artifact lookup. The bounded goal is to eliminate unauthenticated missing/unsupported-credential object probing without racing active token-parser work.

Acceptance

RED -> smallest controller fix -> exact-head mvn verify/100% owned coverage/public Javadocs -> CI/Security Scan/SAST/fuzz -> current-head review/thread refetch. Keep Draft until exact-head GREEN evidence exists; independent approval remains a distinct merge gate.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@seonghobae, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 59 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 43c09aaf-4378-4441-8ab4-16c97610e2ac

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 55d7ae8 and 91b6a5d.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • src/main/java/com/clearfolio/viewer/controller/ArtifactController.java
  • src/test/java/com/clearfolio/viewer/controller/ArtifactControllerTest.java
  • src/test/java/com/clearfolio/viewer/controller/ArtifactControllerTokenPreconditionTest.java

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@seonghobae
seonghobae marked this pull request as ready for review August 10, 2026 16:25
@seonghobae
seonghobae enabled auto-merge (squash) August 11, 2026 06:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant