This disallows putting URLs in topic titles for TL0 users, which means that:
If a TL-0 user puts a link into the title, a topic featured link won't be generated (as if it was disabled in the site settings)
Server methods for creating and updating topics will be refusing featured links when they are called by TL-0 users
TL-0 users won't be able to put any link into the topic title. For example, the title "Hey, take a look at https://my-site.com" will be rejected.
Also, it improves a bit server behavior when creating or updating feature links on topics in the categories with disabled featured links. Before the server just silently ignored a featured link field that was passed to him, now it will be returning 422 response.
Over the years we accrued many spelling mistakes in the code base.
This PR attempts to fix spelling mistakes and typos in all areas of the code that are extremely safe to change
- comments
- test descriptions
- other low risk areas
* FIX: Ensure the same email cannot be invited twice
When creating a new invite with a duplicated email, the old invite will
be updated and returned. When updating an invite with a duplicated email
address, an error will be returned.
* FIX: not Ember helper does not exist
* FIX: Sync can_invite_to_forum? and can_invite_to?
The two methods should perform the same basic set of checks, such as
check must_approve_users site setting.
Ideally, one of the methods would call the other one or be merged and
that will happen in the future.
* FIX: Show invite to group if user is group owner
This PR adds a new category setting which is a column in the `categories` table, `allow_unlimited_owner_edits_on_first_post`.
What this does is:
* Inside the `can_edit_post?` method of `PostGuardian`, if the current user editing a post is the owner of the post, it is the first post, and the topic's category has `allow_unlimited_owner_edits_on_first_post`, then we bypass the check for `LimitedEdit#edit_time_limit_expired?` on that post.
* Also, similar to wiki topics, in `PostActionNotifier#after_create_post_revision` we send a notification to all users watching a topic when the OP is edited in a topic with the category setting `allow_unlimited_owner_edits_on_first_post` enabled.
This is useful for forums where there is a Marketplace or similar category, where topics are created and then updated indefinitely by the OP rather than the OP making new topics or additional replies. In a way this acts similar to a wiki that only one person can edit.
This PR allows invitations to be used when the DiscourseConnect SSO is enabled for a site (`enable_discourse_connect`) and local logins are disabled. Previously invites could not be accepted with SSO enabled simply because we did not have the code paths to handle that logic.
The invitation methods that are supported include:
* Inviting people to groups via email address
* Inviting people to topics via email address
* Using invitation links generated by the Invite Users UI in the /my/invited/pending route
The flow works like this:
1. User visits an invite URL
2. The normal invitation validations (redemptions/expiry) happen at that point
3. We store the invite key in a secure session
4. The user clicks "Accept Invitation and Continue" (see below)
5. The user is redirected to /session/sso then to the SSO provider URL then back to /session/sso_login
6. We retrieve the invite based on the invite key in secure session. We revalidate the invitation. We show an error to the user if it is not valid. An additional check here for invites with an email specified is to check the SSO email matches the invite email
7. If the invite is OK we create the user via the normal SSO methods
8. We redeem the invite and activate the user. We clear the invite key in secure session.
9. If the invite had a topic we redirect the user there, otherwise we redirect to /
Note that we decided for SSO-based invites the `must_approve_users` site setting is ignored, because the invite is a form of pre-approval, and because regular non-staff users cannot send out email invites or generally invite to the forum in this case.
Also deletes some group invite checks as per https://github.com/discourse/discourse/pull/12353
The 'Discourse SSO' protocol is being rebranded to DiscourseConnect. This should help to reduce confusion when 'SSO' is used in the generic sense.
This commit aims to:
- Rename `sso_` site settings. DiscourseConnect specific ones are prefixed `discourse_connect_`. Generic settings are prefixed `auth_`
- Add (server-side-only) backwards compatibility for the old setting names, with deprecation notices
- Copy `site_settings` database records to the new names
- Rename relevant translation keys
- Update relevant translations
This commit does **not** aim to:
- Rename any Ruby classes or methods. This might be done in a future commit
- Change any URLs. This would break existing integrations
- Make any changes to the protocol. This would break existing integrations
- Change any functionality. Further normalization across DiscourseConnect and other auth methods will be done separately
The risks are:
- There is no backwards compatibility for site settings on the client-side. Accessing auth-related site settings in Javascript is fairly rare, and an error on the client side would not be security-critical.
- If a plugin is monkey-patching parts of the auth process, changes to locale keys could cause broken error messages. This should also be unlikely. The old site setting names remain functional, so security-related overrides will remain working.
A follow-up commit will be made with a post-deploy migration to delete the old `site_settings` rows.
This adds a new min_trust_level_to_allow_ignore site setting that enables admins to control the point at which a user is allowed to ignore other users.
There are issues around displaying images on published pages when secure media is enabled. This PR temporarily makes it appear as if published pages are enabled if secure media is also enabled.
* FEATURE - allow category group moderators to delete topics
* Allow individual posts to be deleted
* DEV - refactor for new `can_moderate_topic?` method
* FEATURE: allow category group moderators to edit posts
If the `enable_category_group_moderation` SiteSetting is enabled, posts should be editable by those belonging to the appropraite groups.
Since 9e4ed03, moderators can view groups with visibility level set to "Group owners, members and moderators".
This fixes an issue where moderators can see the group in /g but then get a 404 when clicking on individual groups.
Because we allow all the other flag types on a deleted post we should be
able to send a pm to the user letting them know why we deleted their
post.
Bug report:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/-/161156
In some restricted setups all JS payloads need tight control.
This setting bans admins from making changes to JS on the site and
requires all themes be whitelisted to be used.
There are edge cases we still need to work through in this mode
hence this is still not supported in production and experimental.
Use an example like this to enable:
`DISCOURSE_WHITELISTED_THEME_REPOS="https://repo.com/repo.git,https://repo.com/repo2.git"`
By default this feature is not enabled and no changes are made.
One exception is that default theme id was missing a security check
this was added for correctness.
If the feature is enabled, staff members can construct a URL and publish a
topic for others to browse without the regular Discourse chrome.
This is useful if you want to use Discourse like a CMS and publish
topics as articles, which can then be embedded into other systems.
* FIX: guardian always got user but sometimes it is anonymous
```
def initialize(user = nil, request = nil)
@user = user.presence || AnonymousUser.new
@request = request
end
```
AnonymouseUser defines `blank?` method
```
class AnonymousUser
def blank?
true
end
...
end
```
so if we would use @user.present? it would be correct, however, just @user is always true
This fix ensures that the site setting `post_edit_time_limit` does not
bypass the limit of the site setting `min_trust_to_edit_post`. This
prevents a bug where users that did not meet the minimum trust level to
edit could edit the title of topics.
* FEATURE: Ability to add components to all themes
This is the first and functional step from that topic https://dev.discourse.org/t/adding-a-theme-component-is-too-much-work/15398/16
The idea here is that when a new component is added, the user can easily assign it to all themes (parents).
To achieve that, I needed to change a site-setting component to accept `setDefaultValues` action and `setDefaultValuesLabel` translated label.
Also, I needed to add `allowAny` option to disable that for theme selector.
I also refactored backend to accept both parent and child ids with one method to avoid duplication (Renamed `add_child_theme!` to more general `add_relative_theme!`)
* FIX: Improvement after code review
* FIX: Improvement after code review2
* FIX: use mapBy and filterBy directly
* FEATURE: Site setting/ui to allow users to set their primary group
* prettier and remove logic from account template
* added 1 to 43 to make web_hook_user_serializer_spec pass
Zeitwerk simplifies working with dependencies in dev and makes it easier reloading class chains.
We no longer need to use Rails "require_dependency" anywhere and instead can just use standard
Ruby patterns to require files.
This is a far reaching change and we expect some followups here.
This means that TL0 users can message groups with "Who can message this
group?" set to "Everyone".
It also means that members of a group with "Who can message this
group?" set to "members, moderators and admins" can also message the
group, even when their trust level is below min_trust_to_send_messages.
* FEATURE: Add tl2 threshold for editing new posts
* Adds a new setting and for tl2 editing posts (30 days same as old value)
* Sets the tl0/tl1 editing period as 1 day
* FIX: Spec uses wrong setting
* Fix site setting on guardian spec
* FIX: post editing period specs
* Avoid shared examples
* Use update_columns to avoid callbacks on user during tests
There are 5 visibility levels (similar to group visibility)
public (default)
logged-in users
members only
staff
owners
Admins & group owners always have visibility to group members.
All posts created by the user are counted unless they are deleted,
belong to a PM sent between a non-human user and the user or belong
to a PM created by the user which doesn't have any other recipients.
It also makes the guardian prevent self-deletes when SSO is enabled.
Context: https://meta.discourse.org/t/121589
This new setting option lets group owners message/mention large groups
without granting that privilege to all members.
Groups can now be marked as visible to "logged on users". All automatic groups (except `everyone`) are now visible to "logged on users", previously they were marked as public but suppressed in the group page for non-staff.
Alan Guo Xiang Tan
Arpit Jalan
Andrei Prigorshnev
Bianca Nenciu
Dan Ungureanu
Josh Soref
Martin Brennan
David Taylor
tshenry
jbrw
Jahan Gagan
Penar Musaraj
Blake Erickson
Krzysztof Kotlarek
Daniel Waterworth
Joffrey JAFFEUX
Sam Saffron
Robin Ward
Mark VanLandingham
Rimian Perkins
Vinoth Kannan
Gerhard Schlager
romanrizzi