Fix an issue with ignoring power_level changes on divergent graphs

Changes to m.room.power_levels events are supposed to be handled at a high
priority; however a typo meant that the relevant bit of code was never
executed, so they were handled just like any other state change - which meant
that a bad person could cause room state changes by forking the graph from a
point in history when they were allowed to do so.
pull/365/head
Richard van der Hoff 2015-11-12 13:10:25 +00:00
parent 06bfd0a3c0
commit 78f6010207
2 changed files with 104 additions and 5 deletions

View File

@ -307,19 +307,23 @@ class StateHandler(object):
We resolve conflicts in the following order:
1. power levels
2. memberships
3. other events.
2. join rules
3. memberships
4. other events.
"""
resolved_state = {}
power_key = (EventTypes.PowerLevels, "")
if power_key in conflicted_state.items():
power_levels = conflicted_state[power_key]
resolved_state[power_key] = self._resolve_auth_events(power_levels)
if power_key in conflicted_state:
events = conflicted_state[power_key]
logger.debug("Resolving conflicted power levels %r", events)
resolved_state[power_key] = self._resolve_auth_events(
events, auth_events)
auth_events.update(resolved_state)
for key, events in conflicted_state.items():
if key[0] == EventTypes.JoinRules:
logger.debug("Resolving conflicted join rules %r", events)
resolved_state[key] = self._resolve_auth_events(
events,
auth_events
@ -329,6 +333,7 @@ class StateHandler(object):
for key, events in conflicted_state.items():
if key[0] == EventTypes.Member:
logger.debug("Resolving conflicted member lists %r", events)
resolved_state[key] = self._resolve_auth_events(
events,
auth_events
@ -338,6 +343,7 @@ class StateHandler(object):
for key, events in conflicted_state.items():
if key not in resolved_state:
logger.debug("Resolving conflicted state %r:%r", key, events)
resolved_state[key] = self._resolve_normal_events(
events, auth_events
)

View File

@ -317,6 +317,99 @@ class StateTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
{e.event_id for e in context_store["E"].current_state.values()}
)
@defer.inlineCallbacks
def test_branch_have_perms_conflict(self):
userid1 = "@user_id:example.com"
userid2 = "@user_id2:example.com"
nodes = {
"A1": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.Create,
state_key="",
content={"creator": userid1},
depth=1,
),
"A2": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.Member,
state_key=userid1,
content={"membership": Membership.JOIN},
membership=Membership.JOIN,
),
"A3": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.Member,
state_key=userid2,
content={"membership": Membership.JOIN},
membership=Membership.JOIN,
),
"A4": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.PowerLevels,
state_key="",
content={
"events": {"m.room.name": 50},
"users": {userid1: 100,
userid2: 60},
},
),
"A5": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.Name,
state_key="",
),
"B": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.PowerLevels,
state_key="",
content={
"events": {"m.room.name": 50},
"users": {userid2: 30},
},
),
"C": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.Name,
state_key="",
sender=userid2,
),
"D": DictObj(
type=EventTypes.Message,
),
}
edges = {
"A2": ["A1"],
"A3": ["A2"],
"A4": ["A3"],
"A5": ["A4"],
"B": ["A5"],
"C": ["A5"],
"D": ["B", "C"]
}
self._add_depths(nodes, edges)
graph = Graph(nodes, edges)
store = StateGroupStore()
self.store.get_state_groups.side_effect = store.get_state_groups
context_store = {}
for event in graph.walk():
context = yield self.state.compute_event_context(event)
store.store_state_groups(event, context)
context_store[event.event_id] = context
self.assertSetEqual(
{"A1", "A2", "A3", "A5", "B"},
{e.event_id for e in context_store["D"].current_state.values()}
)
def _add_depths(self, nodes, edges):
def _get_depth(ev):
node = nodes[ev]
if 'depth' not in node:
prevs = edges[ev]
depth = max(_get_depth(prev) for prev in prevs) + 1
node['depth'] = depth
return node['depth']
for n in nodes:
_get_depth(n)
@defer.inlineCallbacks
def test_annotate_with_old_message(self):
event = create_event(type="test_message", name="event")