HV-1923: Fix CPF constraint to reject incorrect formats

Author: hoyeonyy

engine/src/main/java/org/hibernate/validator/constraints/br/CPF.java

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
  * @author Victor Rezende dos Santos
  */
 @Pattern.List({
-		@Pattern(regexp = "([0-9]{3}[.]?[0-9]{3}[.]?[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{2})|([0-9]{11})"),
+		@Pattern(regexp = "([0-9]{3}\\.[0-9]{3}\\.[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{2})|([0-9]{11})"),
 		// XXX.XXX.XXX-XX where X is always the same digit are not a valid CPFs, but all of them passes the mod check. Needs to be singled out each one via regexp
 		@Pattern(regexp = "^(?:(?!000\\.?000\\.?000-?00).)*$"),
 		@Pattern(regexp = "^(?:(?!111\\.?111\\.?111-?11).)*$"),

engine/src/main/java/org/hibernate/validator/internal/constraintvalidators/hv/br/CPFValidator.java

@@ -18,14 +18,10 @@
  */
 public class CPFValidator implements ConstraintValidator<CPF, CharSequence> {
 	private static final Pattern DIGITS_ONLY = Pattern.compile( "\\d+" );
-	private static final Pattern SINGLE_DASH_SEPARATOR = Pattern.compile( "\\d+-\\d\\d" );
 
 	private final Mod11CheckValidator withSeparatorMod11Validator1 = new Mod11CheckValidator();
 	private final Mod11CheckValidator withSeparatorMod11Validator2 = new Mod11CheckValidator();
 
-	private final Mod11CheckValidator withDashOnlySeparatorMod11Validator1 = new Mod11CheckValidator();
-	private final Mod11CheckValidator withDashOnlySeparatorMod11Validator2 = new Mod11CheckValidator();
-
 	private final Mod11CheckValidator withoutSeparatorMod11Validator1 = new Mod11CheckValidator();
 	private final Mod11CheckValidator withoutSeparatorMod11Validator2 = new Mod11CheckValidator();
 
@@ -42,14 +38,6 @@ public void initialize(CPF constraintAnnotation) {
 				0, 12, 13, true, Integer.MAX_VALUE, '0', '0', Mod11Check.ProcessingDirection.RIGHT_TO_LEFT
 		);
 
-		// validates CPF strings with separator, eg 134241313-00
-		withDashOnlySeparatorMod11Validator1.initialize(
-				0, 8, 10, true, Integer.MAX_VALUE, '0', '0', Mod11Check.ProcessingDirection.RIGHT_TO_LEFT
-		);
-		withDashOnlySeparatorMod11Validator2.initialize(
-				0, 10, 11, true, Integer.MAX_VALUE, '0', '0', Mod11Check.ProcessingDirection.RIGHT_TO_LEFT
-		);
-
 		// validates CPF strings without separator, eg 13424131300
 		// checksums as described above, except there are no separator characters
 		withoutSeparatorMod11Validator1.initialize(
@@ -70,14 +58,9 @@ public boolean isValid(CharSequence value, ConstraintValidatorContext context) {
 			return withoutSeparatorMod11Validator1.isValid( value, context )
 					&& withoutSeparatorMod11Validator2.isValid( value, context );
 		}
-		else if ( SINGLE_DASH_SEPARATOR.matcher( value ).matches() ) {
-			return withDashOnlySeparatorMod11Validator1.isValid( value, context )
-					&& withDashOnlySeparatorMod11Validator2.isValid( value, context );
-		}
 		else {
 			return withSeparatorMod11Validator1.isValid( value, context )
 					&& withSeparatorMod11Validator2.isValid( value, context );
-
 		}
 	}
 }

engine/src/test/java/org/hibernate/validator/test/constraints/annotations/hv/br/CPFValidatorTest.java

@@ -99,10 +99,27 @@ public void valid_cpf_without_separator_validates() {
 	}
 
 	@Test
-	@TestForIssue(jiraKey = "HV-979")
-	public void correct_cpf_with_dash_only_separator_validates() {
+	@TestForIssue(jiraKey = "HV-1923")
+	public void incorrect_cpf_with_dash_only_separator_is_invalid() {
 		Set<ConstraintViolation<Person>> violations = validator.validate( new Person( "134241313-00" ) );
-		assertNoViolations( violations );
+		assertThat( violations ).containsOnlyViolations(
+				violationOf( CPF.class ).withProperty( "cpf" )
+		);
+	}
+
+	@Test
+	@TestForIssue(jiraKey = "HV-1923")
+	public void incorrect_cpf_with_partial_dots_is_invalid() {
+		// Test various incorrect formats with partial dots
+		Set<ConstraintViolation<Person>> violations = validator.validate( new Person( "134.241313-00" ) );
+		assertThat( violations ).containsOnlyViolations(
+				violationOf( CPF.class ).withProperty( "cpf" )
+		);
+
+		violations = validator.validate( new Person( "134241.313-00" ) );
+		assertThat( violations ).containsOnlyViolations(
+				violationOf( CPF.class ).withProperty( "cpf" )
+		);
 	}
 
 	@Test