[ISSUE #1370]🚀Add PlainAccessConfig #1371
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a new public module named Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
|
🔊@mxsm 🚀Thanks for your contribution 🎉. CodeRabbit(AI) will review your code first 🔥 |
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
AI review first
rocketmq-rust-robot
added
feature🚀
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1371 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 21.03% 21.21% +0.17%
==========================================
Files 434 435 +1
Lines 55191 55337 +146
==========================================
+ Hits 11611 11741 +130
- Misses 43580 43596 +16 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
rocketmq-common/src/common/base.rs (1)
17-17: Consider documenting the module's purposeSince this is a new public module in the common base package, consider adding a doc comment to describe its purpose and usage.
+/// Provides configuration for plain access control in RocketMQ. +/// This module handles access keys, permissions, and related security settings. pub mod plain_access_config;rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs (2)
23-34: Add documentation for the struct and its fields.The struct lacks documentation explaining its purpose and the significance of each field. Consider adding rustdoc comments to improve maintainability.
Here's a suggested documentation template:
/// Configuration for plain access control in RocketMQ. /// /// This struct manages access configuration settings including credentials, /// permissions, and remote address restrictions. #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Clone, Debug, Default, Eq, PartialEq)] #[serde(rename_all = "camelCase")] pub struct PlainAccessConfig { /// Access key for authentication pub access_key: Option<CheetahString>, // ... (add docs for other fields) }
55-201: Add tests for edge cases and validation.While the current test coverage is good, consider adding tests for:
- Invalid input validation (when implemented)
- Empty strings in optional fields
- Maximum length constraints
- Special characters in fields
- Unicode support in strings
Example test cases:
#[test] fn test_empty_strings() { let config = PlainAccessConfig { access_key: Some(CheetahString::from("")), ..Default::default() }; // Add assertions based on your validation requirements } #[test] fn test_unicode_support() { let config = PlainAccessConfig { access_key: Some(CheetahString::from("🔑")), topic_perms: vec![CheetahString::from("主题")], ..Default::default() }; let serialized = serde_json::to_string(&config).unwrap(); let deserialized: PlainAccessConfig = serde_json::from_str(&serialized).unwrap(); assert_eq!(config, deserialized); }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
rocketmq-common/src/common/base.rs(1 hunks)rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs
[warning] 37-52: rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs#L37-L52
Added lines #L37 - L52 were not covered by tests
🔇 Additional comments (2)
rocketmq-common/src/common/base.rs (1)
17-17: Verify module placement and dependencies
The addition of plain_access_config module in the common base package seems appropriate for access control functionality. However, let's verify:
- The relationship with other modules
- Any potential circular dependencies
- Project structure consistency
✅ Verification successful
Let me verify the module placement and dependencies more specifically by checking the actual implementation and usage.
Module placement is appropriate and no dependency issues found
The placement of plain_access_config module in rocketmq-common/src/common/base.rs is appropriate because:
- It's correctly placed alongside other core functionality like
service_statein the common base package - The implementation shows it's a configuration structure for access control with JSON serialization support
- No circular dependencies were found as there are no imports of this module yet
- It follows the project structure where security-related modules are placed in common (evidenced by it being the only access control module in common)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify module placement and dependencies
# Check if there are any circular dependencies or unexpected imports
echo "Checking for circular dependencies..."
rg -l "use.*plain_access_config"
# Verify project structure consistency
echo "Checking similar security-related modules placement..."
fd -t f ".*config.*\.rs" -x echo "Config file: {}"
# Check if other access control related modules exist
echo "Checking for other access control modules..."
rg -l "access|auth|permission" --type rust
Length of output: 34141
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation of plain_access_config
echo "Checking plain_access_config implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'struct PlainAccessConfig {
$$$
}'
# Check if there are any security/access control related modules in common
echo "Checking for other security modules in common..."
fd -t f -p ".*access.*\.rs|.*auth.*\.rs|.*security.*\.rs" "rocketmq-common/src"
# Check imports of plain_access_config
echo "Checking usage of plain_access_config..."
rg "plain_access_config" -A 3 -B 3
Length of output: 4867
rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs (1)
1-22: LGTM!
The license header is compliant, and imports are appropriate for the functionality.
| pub access_key: Option<CheetahString>, | ||
| pub secret_key: Option<CheetahString>, | ||
| pub white_remote_address: Option<CheetahString>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding validation for security-sensitive fields.
The security-sensitive fields (access_key, secret_key, white_remote_address) should have validation to ensure they meet security requirements (e.g., minimum length, character restrictions).
Consider implementing validation in a constructor or builder pattern:
impl PlainAccessConfig {
pub fn new(access_key: Option<CheetahString>, secret_key: Option<CheetahString>) -> Result<Self, &'static str> {
if let Some(key) = &access_key {
if key.len() < 8 {
return Err("access_key must be at least 8 characters");
}
}
// Similar validation for secret_key
Ok(Self {
access_key,
secret_key,
white_remote_address: None,
admin: false,
default_topic_perm: None,
default_group_perm: None,
topic_perms: Vec::new(),
group_perms: Vec::new(),
})
}
}| impl Display for PlainAccessConfig { | ||
| fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> std::fmt::Result { | ||
| write!( | ||
| f, | ||
| "PlainAccessConfig {{ access_key: {:?}, secret_key: {:?}, white_remote_address: {:?}, \ | ||
| admin: {}, default_topic_perm: {:?}, default_group_perm: {:?}, topic_perms: {:?}, \ | ||
| group_perms: {:?} }}", | ||
| self.access_key, | ||
| self.secret_key, | ||
| self.white_remote_address, | ||
| self.admin, | ||
| self.default_topic_perm, | ||
| self.default_group_perm, | ||
| self.topic_perms, | ||
| self.group_perms | ||
| ) | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Security: Sensitive data exposure in Display implementation confirmed
The review comment is correct. After analyzing the code:
- The struct derives
Debugand implementsDisplay, both exposing sensitive fields - The sensitive fields (
access_keyandsecret_key) are directly printed in the Display implementation - No test coverage exists for the Display implementation
- The struct is used in serialization/deserialization, suggesting it may be logged or transmitted
The suggested fix to mask sensitive data and add test coverage is appropriate, as it follows security best practices for handling credentials.
Points requiring attention:
Displayimplementation exposesaccess_keyandsecret_keyin clear text- No test coverage for the Display implementation masking
- The struct derives
Debugwhich also exposes sensitive data
🔗 Analysis chain
Security: Avoid exposing sensitive data in Display implementation.
The current Display implementation exposes sensitive fields like access_key and secret_key. This could lead to security issues if the output is logged.
Consider masking sensitive fields:
- "PlainAccessConfig {{ access_key: {:?}, secret_key: {:?}, white_remote_address: {:?}, \
+ "PlainAccessConfig {{ access_key: {}, secret_key: {}, white_remote_address: {:?}, \
admin: {}, default_topic_perm: {:?}, default_group_perm: {:?}, topic_perms: {:?}, \
group_perms: {:?} }}",
- self.access_key,
- self.secret_key,
+ self.access_key.as_ref().map_or("None", |_| "***"),
+ self.secret_key.as_ref().map_or("None", |_| "***"),Also, add test coverage for the Display implementation:
#[test]
fn test_display_masks_sensitive_data() {
let config = PlainAccessConfig {
access_key: Some(CheetahString::from("secret123")),
secret_key: Some(CheetahString::from("key123")),
..Default::default()
};
let display_output = format!("{}", config);
assert!(!display_output.contains("secret123"));
assert!(!display_output.contains("key123"));
assert!(display_output.contains("***"));
}🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for potential logging of sensitive data
rg -A 2 'access_key|secret_key' | rg 'log|print|debug|trace|info|warn|error'
Length of output: 78
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any logging or printing of PlainAccessConfig
rg -A 2 "PlainAccessConfig.*{"
# Check if PlainAccessConfig implements Debug trait
ast-grep --pattern 'impl Debug for PlainAccessConfig'
# Check for test files related to PlainAccessConfig
fd "test.*\.rs" | xargs rg "PlainAccessConfig"
Length of output: 1438
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the content of the test file to see how PlainAccessConfig is used
cat rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs
# Check for any logging usage in the same file
rg "log::|println!|debug!|info!|warn!|error!" rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs
Length of output: 8369
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: codecov/patch
[warning] 37-52: rocketmq-common/src/common/base/plain_access_config.rs#L37-L52
Added lines #L37 - L52 were not covered by tests
rocketmq-rust-bot
added
approved
Which Issue(s) This PR Fixes(Closes)
Fixes #1370
Brief Description
How Did You Test This Change?
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
PlainAccessConfigstruct for handling access-related configurations, including keys and permissions.Tests
PlainAccessConfigstruct to ensure proper functionality and serialization.