template: protected routes with RBA and other validations #6
Conversation
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your free trial has ended. If you'd like to continue receiving code reviews, you can add a payment method here.
WalkthroughThe code in Changes
Poem
✨ Finishing Touches
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. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. 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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
|
Refacto is reviewing this PR. Please wait for the review comments to be posted. |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @arvi18, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request introduces several modifications to the example_protected_routes.py file, aiming to enhance API endpoint security through authentication and role-based access control, alongside adding specific input validations. The changes involve updating dependency requirements for certain routes, refining how user information (like roles and email) is accessed, and implementing new validation logic for resource management endpoints.
Highlights
- Dependency Adjustments for Access Control: The
active_users_onlyendpoint now usesget_current_userinstead ofget_current_active_user, and thedelete_resourceendpoint's access requirement has been relaxed fromrequire_admintoget_current_user. - User Data Access Refinements: Updated
get_user_infoto safely access email and to use arolesattribute instead of a singularrole, anduser_or_adminnow uses a safe.get()call for theroleattribute. - In-Endpoint Validations and Resource Handling: Added an explicit role check within the
admin_onlyendpoint and introduced automatic ID generation and anamefield validation for thecreate_resourceendpoint. Thedelete_resourceendpoint'sresource_idparameter type was also changed fromstrtoint.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces several protected API endpoints with role-based access control. The review identified several critical issues, including a security vulnerability that allows any user to delete resources, and bugs that would cause runtime errors due to incorrect data keys and type mismatches. There are also high-severity issues related to removed business logic checks. Several medium-severity issues regarding code cleanliness and redundancy were also noted. The provided suggestions aim to fix these bugs, close the security hole, and align the implementation with FastAPI best practices.
![refacto-test[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/196302493?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 7
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
app/example_protected_routes.py(6 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (1)
app/example_protected_routes.py (1)
app/auth/dependencies.py (2)
get_current_user(10-32)get_current_active_user(35-44)
🪛 Ruff (0.12.2)
app/example_protected_routes.py
1-1: fastapi.Request imported but unused
Remove unused import: fastapi.Request
(F401)
3-3: typing.Optional imported but unused
Remove unused import: typing.Optional
(F401)
4-4: json imported but unused
Remove unused import: json
(F401)
27-27: Do not perform function call Depends in argument defaults; instead, perform the call within the function, or read the default from a module-level singleton variable
(B008)
87-87: Do not perform function call Depends in argument defaults; instead, perform the call within the function, or read the default from a module-level singleton variable
(B008)
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
|
/refacto-test |
|
Refacto is reviewing this PR. Please wait for the review comments to be posted. |
|
/refacto-test |
|
PR already reviewed at the latest commit: 25bb212. |
|
/refacto-test |
|
Refacto is reviewing this PR. Please wait for the review comments to be posted. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
app/example_protected_routes.py (1)
1-4: Remove unused imports to clean up the code.The static analysis correctly identifies that
Request,Optional, andjsonimports are not used anywhere in the file.Apply this diff to remove the unused imports:
-from fastapi import APIRouter, Depends, Request +from fastapi import APIRouter, Depends -from typing import Dict, Any, Optional -import json +from typing import Dict, Any
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
app/example_protected_routes.py(5 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (1)
app/example_protected_routes.py (1)
app/auth/dependencies.py (2)
get_current_user(10-32)get_current_active_user(35-44)
🪛 Ruff (0.12.2)
app/example_protected_routes.py
1-1: fastapi.Request imported but unused
Remove unused import: fastapi.Request
(F401)
3-3: typing.Optional imported but unused
Remove unused import: typing.Optional
(F401)
4-4: json imported but unused
Remove unused import: json
(F401)
85-85: Do not perform function call Depends in argument defaults; instead, perform the call within the function, or read the default from a module-level singleton variable
(B008)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
app/example_protected_routes.py (3)
18-18: Good defensive programming with .get() method.Using
.get("email", "unknown")provides a sensible fallback and prevents potential KeyError exceptions if the email field is missing from the user data.
56-56: Consider security implications of role fallback values.While using
.get("role") or "unknown"prevents KeyError exceptions, providing a fallback value for security-critical fields like user roles could mask authentication/authorization issues. If the role is missing, it might indicate a problem with the authentication system that should be addressed explicitly rather than silently handled.Consider implementing strict role validation instead:
- "user_role": current_user.get("role") or "unknown" + "user_role": current_user["role"] # Let it fail if role is missingOr add explicit validation:
- "user_role": current_user.get("role") or "unknown" + "user_role": current_user.get("role") or raise ValueError("User role missing from authentication data")
84-85: Admin restriction properly restored.The delete endpoint now correctly uses
Depends(require_admin)which enforces admin-only access as intended. Theresource_idparameter type is back tostrwhich maintains API compatibility.
1 participant
Add protected API endpoints for authenticated user access, including role-based routes for users and admins.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes