Update vnext #314
Update vnext #314
Conversation
Improve 404 page
…ns-when-using-v-html Sanitise translations when using v-html
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several changes focused on enhancing the navigation and user experience of the application. Key modifications include updating the API documentation link in the VitePress configuration to point to an internal resource, creating a new API documentation page, and making adjustments to the styling of the 404 error page. Additionally, the Changes
Possibly related PRs
Security Recommendations
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (5)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
🔇 Additional comments (7)frontend/pages/[...all].vue (1)
The implementation follows security best practices by:
docs/en/api.md (4)
The page configuration is correctly set up for a full-width API documentation page.
Hiding the TryItPanel is a reasonable security measure to prevent unauthorized API testing in documentation.
Security: Add integrity checks for external resources. Loading external resources from CDN without Subresource Integrity (SRI) checks poses a security risk. If the CDN is compromised, malicious code could be injected. Apply this diff to add integrity checks and error handling: const elementScript = document.createElement('script');
elementScript.src = 'https://unpkg.com/@stoplight/elements/web-components.min.js';
+elementScript.integrity = 'sha384-[Replace with actual hash]';
+elementScript.crossOrigin = 'anonymous';
+elementScript.onerror = () => console.error('Failed to load Stoplight Elements script');
document.head.appendChild(elementScript);
const elementStyle = document.createElement('link');
elementStyle.rel = 'stylesheet';
elementStyle.href = 'https://unpkg.com/@stoplight/elements/styles.min.css';
+elementStyle.integrity = 'sha384-[Replace with actual hash]';
+elementStyle.crossOrigin = 'anonymous';
+elementStyle.onerror = () => console.error('Failed to load Stoplight Elements styles');
document.head.appendChild(elementStyle);Consider also:
Run this script to check if the resources are available and get their SRI hashes:
The current configuration loads the API specification directly from the main branch through a CDN, which presents several security considerations:
Run this script to check the API spec for sensitive information: Consider:
✅ Verification successfulLet me analyze the local codebase first to understand the API documentation structure and potential sensitive information exposure. The previous curl command showed that the remote API spec does contain authentication-related endpoints ( I want to analyze the actual API specification content and authentication configuration to provide accurate security recommendations regarding the CDN-hosted API spec. Security: API specification exposure is acceptable with recommended improvements After analyzing the API specification, I can confirm that:
However, to improve security and maintainability:
🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Description: Check API spec for potential sensitive information
echo "Analyzing API spec for sensitive patterns..."
curl -s "https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/sysadminsmedia/homebox@main/docs/docs/api/openapi-2.0.json" | \
jq -r '.paths | keys[]' | \
grep -iE '(admin|internal|private|secret|auth|login|password)'
Length of output: 516 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Let's verify if the API spec file exists locally and analyze its contents
fd "openapi-2.0.json" --type f
# Check if we have any API documentation files that might contain sensitive info
fd -e json -e yaml -e yml --type f . docs | grep -i "api"
# Look for any authentication or sensitive endpoint definitions in the codebase
rg -i "auth|login|password|secret|internal|private" --type json --type yaml -C 2
Length of output: 74924 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Let's check if there are any sensitive endpoints or data in the API spec
cat docs/docs/api/openapi-2.0.json | jq '.'
# Check if there are any environment variables or configuration files that might contain sensitive info
fd -e env -e yaml -e yml -e json . | grep -i "config\|env"
# Look for any authentication-related code
rg -g "!{dist,build,node_modules}/*" -i "auth.\{0,20\}provider|login.\{0,20\}provider" -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 65967 docs/.vitepress/config.mts (2)Line range hint The configuration demonstrates good security practices:
While moving the API documentation internally is a good practice, ensure that sensitive API details (if any) are properly protected. Consider implementing authentication for the API documentation if it contains sensitive endpoints or implementation details. ✅ Verification successfulAPI documentation is publicly accessible and properly configured The API documentation is using Stoplight Elements to render an OpenAPI specification from a public CDN. The implementation:
Since this is a public documentation site and the API specification is intentionally public, no additional access controls are necessary. The current implementation follows security best practices for public API documentation. 🏁 Scripts executedThe following scripts were executed for the analysis: Script: #!/bin/bash
# Check if there are any authentication mechanisms in place for the API docs
rg -l "auth|protect|secure" docs/en/api.md || echo "No authentication mechanisms found in API docs"
# Check for potential sensitive information in API docs
rg -i "secret|key|token|password|credential" docs/en/api.md || echo "No obvious sensitive information found in API docs"
Length of output: 320 Script: #!/bin/bash
# Let's check the content of the API documentation to understand its nature
cat docs/en/api.md || echo "API documentation file not found"
# Check if there are any other API-related files
fd -e md -e mdx "api" docs/
# Look for any configuration related to API docs security
rg -i "api.*security|security.*api" .
Length of output: 1003 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
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Caution
Inline review comments failed to post. This is likely due to GitHub's limits when posting large numbers of comments.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
frontend/pages/[...all].vue (1)
Line range hint
1-17: Consider enhancing 404 error monitoring.While the implementation is secure, consider adding monitoring capabilities to detect potential security scanning attempts through 404 hits.
Recommendations:
- Implement rate limiting for 404 requests
- Add logging for security analysis
- Consider implementing a WAF rule to monitor suspicious 404 patterns
Would you like assistance in implementing any of these security enhancements?
frontend/pages/tools.vue (2)
Line range hint
134-144: Improve error handling and user feedback mechanisms.The current error handling could be enhanced for better security and user experience:
- Add specific error codes and messages instead of generic "Failed to..." messages
- Implement error recovery mechanisms
- Consider logging failed attempts for security monitoring
Example implementation:
if (result.error) { - notify.error("Failed to ensure asset IDs."); + const errorMessage = `Operation failed: ${result.error.code}. Please contact support if this persists.`; + console.error('[Asset IDs Update]', result.error); + notify.error(errorMessage); + // Log to security monitoring + await api.security.logFailedOperation({ + operation: 'ensureAssetIDs', + error: result.error, + timestamp: new Date() + }); return; }Also applies to: 156-166, 178-188, 200-210
Based on the findings from the codebase analysis, I can now provide a final response:
🔐 Security measures need enhancement for bulk administrative operations
While Bearer token authentication is properly implemented for these endpoints, additional security measures are recommended:
- Add rate limiting for these bulk operations to prevent resource exhaustion
- Implement audit logging to track who performed these sensitive operations and when
- Consider adding pagination or batch processing for large datasets to prevent timeouts
- Add admin-specific role checks in addition to the current authentication
These bulk operations can significantly impact the system and should have additional safeguards beyond the current authentication mechanism.
🔗 Analysis chain
Line range hint
124-201: Enhance security measures for sensitive administrative operations.The administrative functions contain sensitive bulk operations that could benefit from additional security measures:
- Consider implementing rate limiting or pagination for bulk operations
- Add audit logging for these administrative actions
- Consider adding a secondary confirmation for critical operations (e.g., requiring admin password re-entry)
Let's verify if audit logging exists in the API calls:
Let me check the API implementation to verify if there's any audit logging or rate limiting in place.
Let me check the backend implementation for these actions to see if there are any security measures in place.
Let me check the middleware implementation to understand the authentication and authorization controls.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for audit logging implementations in API-related files rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" -A 5 "api.actions.(ensureAssetIDs|ensureImportRefs|resetItemDateTimes|setPrimaryPhotos)"Length of output: 1358
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for API actions implementation rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" "class.*Actions" -A 10 # Search for audit logging related code rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" "(audit|log|track).*action" -A 5Length of output: 1352
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for backend action handlers rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" -A 15 "/actions/(ensure-asset-ids|zero-item-time-fields|set-primary-photos|ensure-import-refs)" # Search for middleware or authentication checks rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" -B 5 "func.*actions.*Handler"Length of output: 24474
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for middleware implementation rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" -B 10 "var userMW" # Search for any rate limiting implementation rg -g "!node_modules" -g "!dist" "(rate.*limit|throttle)"Length of output: 517
🛑 Comments failed to post (1)
frontend/pages/tools.vue (1)
43-43: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider enhancing DOMPurify configuration for stronger XSS protection.
While the implementation of DOMPurify is a good security measure, consider adding specific configuration options to further strengthen the XSS protection:
-import DOMPurify from "dompurify"; +import DOMPurify from "dompurify"; + +const sanitizeConfig = { + ALLOWED_TAGS: ['b', 'i', 'em', 'strong', 'a'], + ALLOWED_ATTR: ['href', 'target'], + RETURN_DOM_FRAGMENT: false, + RETURN_DOM: false, + SANITIZE_DOM: true +}; + +const sanitizeHTML = (html: string) => DOMPurify.sanitize(html, sanitizeConfig);Then update the v-html directives:
-v-html="DOMPurify.sanitize($t('tools.import_export_set.import_sub'))" +v-html="sanitizeHTML($t('tools.import_export_set.import_sub'))"Also applies to: 60-60, 78-78, 84-84, 94-94
Just updating the vnext branch with the latest main changes.
Summary by CodeRabbit
Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes
DOMPurifyfor sanitizing HTML content in the tools page.Style