* fix(db): enforce balance check on directly inserted posted journal entries check_balance_on_post only fires on the draft-to-posted UPDATE transition, so any code path that INSERTs a row with status 'posted' directly skipped balance validation entirely. The invariant sum(debit) = sum(credit) on every posted entry was DB-enforced only for the engine's commit lifecycle. Add check_balance_on_posted_insert, a deferred constraint trigger on AFTER INSERT WHEN (NEW.status = 'posted') reusing the existing check_journal_entry_balance() function, which already handles the journal_entries INSERT context via NEW.id/NEW.status. Deferred semantics let an atomic transaction insert header and lines together; zero-line and unbalanced posted inserts are rejected at constraint evaluation. All existing checks stay intact; this only adds coverage. The one first-party posted-INSERT path outside an RPC, the sandbox seed, now books through the bookkeeping engine (createJournalEntry) instead of raw inserts. SIE import already inserts header and lines in a single transaction via its structured RPC and passes unchanged. pg tests cover the new path (zero-line rejected, unbalanced rejected at SET CONSTRAINTS IMMEDIATE, balanced same-transaction insert accepted) and existing posted-entry fixtures move to a transactional insertPostedJournalEntry helper so they stay valid setup. Fixes #327 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(tests): insert list-filters pg fixtures in one transaction The list-filters suite (landed via a sibling merge) inserted posted headers with getPool().query, where each query autocommits: the deferred check_balance_on_posted_insert constraint fired at the header's own commit with zero lines and correctly rejected the fixture. Header and balanced lines now share one BEGIN/COMMIT so the constraint evaluates the complete entry, mirroring the insertPostedJournalEntry helper. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(seed): insert journal headers as drafts, post after lines land check_balance_on_posted_insert (renamed to apply-time version 20260806130000) rejects a posted header whose transaction has no lines. PostgREST autocommits each request, so every seed path that inserted posted headers first would die with "has zero total": the sandbox seed (ledger history, invoice vouchers, salary vouchers), seed-demo-account and seed-export-data. All now insert draft headers, insert lines, then flip to posted so check_balance_on_post validates the finished verifikat. The sandbox seed keeps its documented no-events design. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(db): preserve a preset committed_at on draft-to-posted transition set_committed_at() stamped now() unconditionally, so the seed flows that post backdated drafts lost their historical booking timestamps and every demo verifikat read as booked today (CodeRabbit finding on PR 1439). Stamp only when committed_at is NULL: the engine path (drafts carry no committed_at) behaves exactly as before and a posted entry still always has a committed_at; an explicitly supplied value now survives posting. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(db): preserve preset committed_at only for trusted roles The IS NULL guard alone (20260806150000, never shipped; replaced by 20260806160000) let any RLS-permitted member backdate committed_at through PostgREST by presetting it on a draft and posting, which the Swedish accounting review flagged: committed_at is what the BFL 5 kap timeliness checks and behandlingshistorik treat as the genuine transition time. Preset values now survive posting only for service_role/postgres/supabase_admin; authenticated and anon writers always get the now() stamp. Consequence: the sandbox seed (runs as the requesting user) gets committed_at = posting time, accepted and documented in the route; the demo scripts run as service_role and keep their backdated history. pg tests cover all four paths, with the upper timestamp bound CodeRabbit asked for. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(db): restore superseded migration so the preview tracker stays consistent The preview branch had already applied 20260806150000 when the previous commit deleted the file, orphaning the preview's migration tracker ("Remote migration versions not found in local migrations directory"). Restored with a header explaining it is superseded in the same deploy by 20260806160000, so the unguarded semantics are never live on their own. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(db): decide committed_at trust by JWT claims, not current_user The Swedish review found the current_user guard bypassable: commit_journal_entry is SECURITY DEFINER and granted to authenticated, so inside it current_user is the function owner and a member could preset a backdated committed_at on a direct-inserted draft and launder it through the RPC. The guard now reads the JWT claims role (same primitive as the RPC's own tenant guard): preset values survive only for service_role or claim-less backend connections; authenticated and anon callers are always stamped now(), on both the direct UPDATE and the RPC path (new pg test). Both migration files now carry the identical final body so no unguarded intermediate exists as a standalone applyable unit. Behandlingshistorik logging of trusted overrides is follow-up #1444. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
218 lines
8.8 KiB
TypeScript
218 lines
8.8 KiB
TypeScript
/**
|
|
* pg-real test for the voucher-link write-RPC tenant guard
|
|
* (20260615120000_link_voucher_rpcs_tenant_guard.sql).
|
|
*
|
|
* link_invoice_to_voucher and link_supplier_invoice_to_voucher are SECURITY
|
|
* DEFINER and EXECUTE-able by authenticated, so without the guard any
|
|
* authenticated user could call them directly with another company's id and
|
|
* mutate that tenant's invoices + payment rows. The guard enforces membership
|
|
* for anon/authenticated while leaving service_role and direct/superuser access
|
|
* (this harness, migrations) untouched, same pattern as the GL read-RPC guard
|
|
* (tests/pg/gl_lines_rpc_tenant_guard.pg.test.ts).
|
|
*/
|
|
import { describe, it, expect } from 'vitest'
|
|
import { randomUUID } from 'node:crypto'
|
|
import { getPool, withUserContext } from './setup'
|
|
import { insertPostedJournalEntry, seedCompany } from './fixtures'
|
|
|
|
let arrivalSeq = 0
|
|
|
|
async function seedCustomerInvoice(params: {
|
|
userId: string
|
|
companyId: string
|
|
total?: number
|
|
}): Promise<string> {
|
|
const customerId = randomUUID()
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.customers (id, user_id, company_id, name, customer_type)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, 'Test Kund AB', 'swedish_business')`,
|
|
[customerId, params.userId, params.companyId],
|
|
)
|
|
const id = randomUUID()
|
|
const total = params.total ?? 1000
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.invoices
|
|
(id, user_id, company_id, customer_id, invoice_number, invoice_date, due_date,
|
|
currency, subtotal, vat_amount, total, vat_treatment, vat_rate, status,
|
|
paid_amount, remaining_amount)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, $4, $5, '2026-04-01', '2026-05-01', 'SEK',
|
|
$6, 0, $6, 'standard_25', 25, 'sent', 0, $6)`,
|
|
[id, params.userId, params.companyId, customerId, `F-${id.slice(0, 8)}`, total],
|
|
)
|
|
return id
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
async function seedSupplierInvoice(params: {
|
|
userId: string
|
|
companyId: string
|
|
total?: number
|
|
}): Promise<string> {
|
|
const supplierId = randomUUID()
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.suppliers
|
|
(id, user_id, company_id, name, supplier_type, country, default_payment_terms, default_currency)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, 'Leverantör AB', 'swedish_business', 'SE', 30, 'SEK')`,
|
|
[supplierId, params.userId, params.companyId],
|
|
)
|
|
const id = randomUUID()
|
|
const total = params.total ?? 1000
|
|
// Time component for cross-run uniqueness, counter for within-run uniqueness.
|
|
const arrivalNumber = (Date.now() % 1_000_000) * 1000 + arrivalSeq++
|
|
await getPool().query(
|
|
`INSERT INTO public.supplier_invoices
|
|
(id, user_id, company_id, supplier_id, arrival_number, supplier_invoice_number,
|
|
invoice_date, due_date, received_date, status, currency,
|
|
subtotal, vat_amount, total, paid_amount, remaining_amount,
|
|
vat_treatment, reverse_charge, is_credit_note)
|
|
VALUES ($1, $2, $3, $4, $5, $6, '2026-04-01', '2026-05-01', '2026-04-01', 'approved', 'SEK',
|
|
$7, 0, $7, 0, $7, 'standard_25', false, false)`,
|
|
[id, params.userId, params.companyId, supplierId, arrivalNumber, `LF-${arrivalNumber}`, total],
|
|
)
|
|
return id
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
/** Posted voucher crediting 1510 (AR settle) or debiting 244x (AP settle). */
|
|
async function seedPostedVoucher(params: {
|
|
userId: string
|
|
companyId: string
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: string
|
|
side: 'ar' | 'ap'
|
|
amount?: number
|
|
}): Promise<string> {
|
|
const amount = params.amount ?? 1000
|
|
const lines = params.side === 'ar'
|
|
? [
|
|
{ accountNumber: '1930', debitAmount: amount, creditAmount: 0 },
|
|
{ accountNumber: '1510', debitAmount: 0, creditAmount: amount },
|
|
]
|
|
: [
|
|
{ accountNumber: '2440', debitAmount: amount, creditAmount: 0 },
|
|
{ accountNumber: '1930', debitAmount: 0, creditAmount: amount },
|
|
]
|
|
|
|
return insertPostedJournalEntry({
|
|
userId: params.userId,
|
|
companyId: params.companyId,
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: params.fiscalPeriodId,
|
|
voucherNumber: Math.floor(Math.random() * 100000),
|
|
entryDate: '2026-05-05',
|
|
description: 'Betalning',
|
|
sourceType: 'manual',
|
|
lines,
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
const LINK_INVOICE = `SELECT public.link_invoice_to_voucher($1, $2, $3, $4, $5) AS result`
|
|
const LINK_SUPPLIER = `SELECT public.link_supplier_invoice_to_voucher($1, $2, $3, $4, $5) AS result`
|
|
|
|
describe('voucher-link write RPCs: tenant-isolation guard', () => {
|
|
it('blocks an authenticated non-member from linking another company\'s invoice', async () => {
|
|
const a = await seedCompany()
|
|
const b = await seedCompany()
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedCustomerInvoice({ userId: a.userId, companyId: a.companyId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({
|
|
userId: a.userId,
|
|
companyId: a.companyId,
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: a.fiscalPeriodId,
|
|
side: 'ar',
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
// Member of company B probing company A: guard fires before any data
|
|
// access and answers indistinguishably from a missing invoice.
|
|
await withUserContext(b.userId, async (client) => {
|
|
const res = await client.query(LINK_INVOICE, [invoiceId, voucherId, b.userId, a.companyId, null])
|
|
expect(res.rows[0].result).toMatchObject({ ok: false, code: 'LINK_VOUCHER_INVOICE_NOT_FOUND' })
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
// Nothing was mutated on the cross-tenant attempt.
|
|
const inv = await getPool().query(`SELECT status, paid_amount FROM public.invoices WHERE id = $1`, [invoiceId])
|
|
expect(inv.rows[0]).toMatchObject({ status: 'sent' })
|
|
const payments = await getPool().query(
|
|
`SELECT id FROM public.invoice_payments WHERE invoice_id = $1`,
|
|
[invoiceId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(payments.rows).toHaveLength(0)
|
|
|
|
// A member of company A still links successfully through the same path:
|
|
// the guard must not break legitimate user-session calls. The spoofed
|
|
// p_user_id is ignored for user-session callers: the JWT sub is
|
|
// authoritative for payment-row attribution (GDPR Art. 32). Asserted
|
|
// inside the context: withUserContext rolls its transaction back.
|
|
const spoofedUserId = randomUUID()
|
|
await withUserContext(a.userId, async (client) => {
|
|
const res = await client.query(LINK_INVOICE, [invoiceId, voucherId, spoofedUserId, a.companyId, null])
|
|
expect(res.rows[0].result).toMatchObject({ ok: true, invoice_status: 'paid' })
|
|
const payment = await client.query(
|
|
`SELECT user_id FROM public.invoice_payments WHERE invoice_id = $1`,
|
|
[invoiceId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(payment.rows).toHaveLength(1)
|
|
expect(payment.rows[0].user_id).toBe(a.userId)
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('blocks an authenticated non-member from linking another company\'s supplier invoice', async () => {
|
|
const a = await seedCompany()
|
|
const b = await seedCompany()
|
|
const supplierInvoiceId = await seedSupplierInvoice({ userId: a.userId, companyId: a.companyId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({
|
|
userId: a.userId,
|
|
companyId: a.companyId,
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: a.fiscalPeriodId,
|
|
side: 'ap',
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
await withUserContext(b.userId, async (client) => {
|
|
const res = await client.query(LINK_SUPPLIER, [supplierInvoiceId, voucherId, b.userId, a.companyId, null])
|
|
expect(res.rows[0].result).toMatchObject({ ok: false, code: 'LINK_SI_VOUCHER_INVOICE_NOT_FOUND' })
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
const inv = await getPool().query(
|
|
`SELECT status FROM public.supplier_invoices WHERE id = $1`,
|
|
[supplierInvoiceId],
|
|
)
|
|
expect(inv.rows[0]).toMatchObject({ status: 'approved' })
|
|
|
|
await withUserContext(a.userId, async (client) => {
|
|
const res = await client.query(LINK_SUPPLIER, [supplierInvoiceId, voucherId, a.userId, a.companyId, null])
|
|
expect(res.rows[0].result).toMatchObject({ ok: true, invoice_status: 'paid' })
|
|
})
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('direct/superuser access (no JWT role) bypasses the guard', async () => {
|
|
const a = await seedCompany()
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedCustomerInvoice({ userId: a.userId, companyId: a.companyId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({
|
|
userId: a.userId,
|
|
companyId: a.companyId,
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: a.fiscalPeriodId,
|
|
side: 'ar',
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
// The bare pool has no request.jwt.claims: the trusted bypass that the
|
|
// harness, migrations and service-role API paths rely on.
|
|
const res = await getPool().query(LINK_INVOICE, [invoiceId, voucherId, a.userId, a.companyId, null])
|
|
expect(res.rows[0].result).toMatchObject({ ok: true, invoice_status: 'paid' })
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
it('rejects notes longer than the 2000-char Zod cap for all callers', async () => {
|
|
const a = await seedCompany()
|
|
const invoiceId = await seedCustomerInvoice({ userId: a.userId, companyId: a.companyId })
|
|
const voucherId = await seedPostedVoucher({
|
|
userId: a.userId,
|
|
companyId: a.companyId,
|
|
fiscalPeriodId: a.fiscalPeriodId,
|
|
side: 'ar',
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
const res = await getPool().query(LINK_INVOICE, [
|
|
invoiceId,
|
|
voucherId,
|
|
a.userId,
|
|
a.companyId,
|
|
'x'.repeat(2001),
|
|
])
|
|
expect(res.rows[0].result).toMatchObject({ ok: false, code: 'LINK_VOUCHER_NOTES_TOO_LONG' })
|
|
})
|
|
})
|