Previously this was hidden away in an anonymous __init__.py file.
I did think about splitting the models into individual files, like
we do with the top-level models for the app. Since the models are
only imported in one place - i.e. are all used together - it didn't
seem worth the hassle, so I've kept them in one file.
This saves a bit of repetition, and lets us attach other methods to the
collection, rather than having multiple methods on the user object
prefixed with the same name, or random functions floating about.
This takes a similar approach as in the previous commit. Since the
"training channel" doesn't really exist, we need some extra code
to pre-select it if a service is already in training mode. As in
the previous commit, I've removed a few non-critical test cases
where we really don't need to test exhaustively.
Note that we also need some specific code to avoid pre-selecting an
option for non-broadcast services, which only used to work by fluke:
we would try to populate the field with (False, None, 'all'), which
isn't a valid combination, so nothing was selected.
Previously this field had to mimic the final hyphenated string of
the broadcast account type, even though it was only used to select
one of its components. The new, shorter choices make it easier to
simplify the test for the POST request.
I've also deleted a number of test cases for pre-selected radios.
This functionality isn't critical, so we don't need to exhaustively
test every single possible combination of values.
This allows us to start decoupling the form fields from the final,
hyphenated string, which we'll do in the next commits.
Note that I've also removed the conditional that changes the data
of the network field as part of validating it. We shouldn't change
data in validations, and having the new property directly above
makes it clear there's no need for this code.
Previously we had to cope with two forms of the hyphenated string
we use to represent a pending change in broadcast account type.
Using "all" to mean "all providers" matches the behaviour in the
API [1], and means we can remove some complexity.
"training-test-all" isn't ideal, since the provider is irrelevant
for a training mode service. However, this isn't much worse than
the previous "training-test", noting that the channel also has no
relevance. We'll iterate this in later commits.
[1]: 8e1a144f87/migrations/versions/0352_broadcast_provider_types.py (L14)
this is in line with our settings during registration. user verification
involves the browser popping up a PIN prompt. Since the user has already
entered their password correctly to get to this stage, we don't need any
more proof of Something They Know, so there's no need for this.
both routes are already valid, however, the link from sign-in sends to
the old link. it fetches whichever URL is second in the route decorator
list when you call `url_for`. Swapping the order around keeps the routes
valid but starts pointing users to the new url.
the next url comes from sign in via a query param, and needs to go to
the POST /webauthn/authenticate endpoint. That endpoint logs the user
in and returns the redirect to the browser, and will take the next from
the request query params to get there.
also moving the window mocks to beforeEach/afterEach ensures that
promise callbacks from previous tests aren't still associated in future
tests to ensure good test isolation.
unfortunately i couldn't get mocking location for a single js test to
work, but by changing the global config i was able to add some query
params that i can expect to be passed through. Don't love this at all
but not quite sure of a good way round this. I think we're not
practicing very good hygiene and best practices with our mocking and
it's really confounding me here.
We only need domains in here which either:
- don’t belong to a single organisation (eg gov.uk)
All other domains should be stored in the database.
This PR removes domains which are now in the database.
Before
---
```sql
select domain from domain where domain in ('gov.uk', 'mod.uk', 'mil.uk', 'd
dc-mod.org', 'gov.scot', 'parliament.scot', 'parliament.uk', 'nhs.uk', 'nhs.net', 'nhs.scot', 'police.uk', 'scotent.c
o.uk', 'assembly.wales', 'cjsm.net', 'gov.wales', 'ac.uk', 'sch.uk', 'onevoicewales.wales', 'mtvh.co.uk', 'wmca.org.u
k', 'suttonmail.org');
```
+-----------------+
| domain |
|-----------------+
| mtvh.co.uk |
| wmca.org.uk |
| gov.wales |
| gov.scot |
| parliament.uk |
| assembly.wales |
| mil.uk |
| mod.uk |
| ddc-mod.org |
| parliament.scot |
| scotent.co.uk |
+-----------------+
After
---
```sql
select domain from domain where domain in ('gov.uk', 'nhs.uk', 'nhs.ne
t', 'nhs.scot', 'police.uk', 'cjsm.net', 'ac.uk', 'sch.uk', 'onevoicewales.wales', 'suttonmail.org') ;
```
+----------+
| domain |
|----------|
+----------+
_complete_webauthn_authentication -> _verify_webauthn_authentication
This function just does verification of the actual auth process -
checking the challenge is correct, the signature matches the public key
we have stored in our database, etc.
verify_webauthn_login -> _complete_webauthn_login_attempt
This function doesn't do any actual verification, we've already verified
the user is who they say they are (or not), it's about marking the
attempt, either unsuccessful (we bump the failed_login_count in the db)
or successful (we set the logged_in_at and current_session_id in the
db).
This change also informs changes to the names of methods on the user
model and in user_api_client.
flashes are consumed by the jinja template calling get_flashed_messages
in flash_messages.html.
When you call `abort(403)` the 403 error page is rendered, with the
flashed message on it. However, the webauthn endpoints just return that
page to the ajax `fetch`, which ignores the response and just reloads
the page.
Instead of calling abort, we can just return an empty response body and
the 403 error code, so that the flashed messages stay in the session and
will be rendered when the `GET /two-factor-webauthn` request happens
after the js reloads the page.
notably i had to change `window.location = foo` to
`window.location.assign` so that i could have something to spy on with
jest. mocking sucks. Otherwise this is pretty similar to the
registerSecurityKey.test.js file.
the js fetch function is really not designed to work with 302s. when it
receives a 302, it automatically follows it and fetches the next page.
This is awkward because I don't want js to do all this in ajax, I want
the browser to get the new URL so it can load the page.
A better approach is to view the admin endpoint as a more pure API: the
js sends a request for authentication to the admin app, and the admin
app responds with a 200 indicating success, and then a payload of
relevant data with that.
The relevant data in this case is "Which URL should I redirect to", it
might be the user's list of services page, or it might be a page telling
them that their email needs revalidating.
this doesn't include timeouts or other errors on the browser side - the
main thing this catches is if the token doesn't belong to the user.
However I'm not entirely clear if that's something that will be caught
at this point, or if the browser would reject that key as it's not in
the credentials passed in to the begin_authentication process.
the js `fetch` function will follow redirects blindly and return you the
final 200 response. when there's an error, we don't want to go anywhere,
and we want to use the flask `flash` functionality to pop up an error
page (the likely reason for seeing this is using a yubikey that isn't
associated with your user). using `flash` and then
`window.location.reload()` handles this fine.
However, when the user does log in succesfully we need to properly log
them in - this includes:
* checking their account isn't over the max login count
* resetting failed login count to 0 if not
* setting a new session id in the database (so other browser windows are
logged out)
* checking if they need to revalidate their email access (every 90 days)
* clearing old user out of the cache
This code all happens in the ajax function rather than being in a
separate redirect, so that you can't just navigate to the login flow. I
wasn't able to unit test that function due how it uses the session and
other flask globals, so moved the auth into its own function so it's
easy to stub out all that CBOR nonsense.
TODO: We still need to pass any `next` URLs through the chain from login
page all the way through the javascript AJAX calls and redirects to the
log_in_user function
The flow of the code is roughly as follows:
user clicks button on webauthn page
js sends GET request
python reads GET request, sets up login challenge
python returns login challenge in response
js reads GET response, passes login challenge to browser
browser asks user to touch yubikey
browser returns yubikey challenge response data to js
js sends POST request with yubikey challenge response data
python reads yubikey challenge and compares with users creds from db
if its a match, python signs user in
The login challenge is a PublicKeyCredentialRequestOptions: [1]
The browser function we call is navigator.credentials.get(): [2]
The response to the challenge from the browser is a PublicKeyCredential: [3]
The python server does all the work setting those up and tearing them
back down again (and checking them against the values we have stored in
the database), but we need to do work to convert them to-and-from CBOR.
[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PublicKeyCredentialRequestOptions
[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/CredentialsContainer/get
[3] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PublicKeyCredential
if user has `webauthn_auth` as their auth type, then redirect them to an
interstitial that prompts them to click on a button which right now just
logs to the JS console, but in a future commit will open up the webauthn
browser prompt
content is unsurprisingly not final.
I don’t think we need to say (all networks) in the header. The real
benefit of this change is forcing the platform admin person making the
change to explicitly give their choice of network.
And by not putting it in the label we don’t have future users from other
organisations wondering if there’s some option other than ‘all networks’
they need to think about.
