- Removes displaying XRay scan results in the dashboard. I'm not sure
anyone was even using this integration so it's just debt for us to
maintain. We can open up a separate issue to get rid of the db tables
once we know for sure that we haven't broken anyone.
- Update go.mod to use Go 1.24.1
- Update GitHub Actions setup-go action to use Go 1.24.1
- Fix linting issues with golangci-lint by:
- Updating to golangci-lint v1.57.1 (more compatible with Go 1.24.1)
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude <claude@anthropic.com>
Closes
[coder/internal#477](https://github.com/coder/internal/issues/477)
I'm solving this issue in two parts:
1. Updated the postgres function so that it doesn't omit 0 values in the
error
2. Created a new query to fetch the number of resources associated with
an organization and using that information to provider a cleaner error
message to the frontend
> **_NOTE:_** SQL is not my strong suit, and the code was created with
the help of AI. So I'd take extra time looking over what I wrote there
Pre-requisite for https://github.com/coder/coder/pull/16891
Closes https://github.com/coder/internal/issues/515
This PR introduces a new concept of a "system" user.
Our data model requires that all workspaces have an owner (a `users`
relation), and prebuilds is a feature that will spin up workspaces to be
claimed later by actual users - and thus needs to own the workspaces in
the interim.
Naturally, introducing a change like this touches a few aspects around
the codebase and we've taken the approach _default hidden_ here; in
other words, queries for users will by default _exclude_ all system
users, but there is a flag to ensure they can be displayed. This keeps
the changeset relatively small.
This user has minimal permissions (it's equivalent to a `member` since
it has no roles). It will be associated with the default org in the
initial migration, and thereafter we'll need to somehow ensure its
membership aligns with templates (which are org-scoped) for which it'll
need to provision prebuilds; that's a solution we'll have in a
subsequent PR.
---------
Signed-off-by: Danny Kopping <dannykopping@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Sas Swart <sas.swart.cdk@gmail.com>
This PR is [resolving the dispatch part of Coder
Inbocx](https://github.com/coder/internal/issues/403).
Since the DB layer has been merged - we now want to insert notifications
into Coder Inbox in parallel of the other delivery target.
To do so, we push two messages instead of one using the `Enqueue`
method.
The experimental functions in `golang.org/x/exp/slices` are now
available in the standard library since Go 1.21.
Reference: https://go.dev/doc/go1.21#slices
Signed-off-by: Eng Zer Jun <engzerjun@gmail.com>
Using negative permissions, this role prevents a user's ability to
create & delete a workspace within a given organization.
Workspaces are uniquely owned by an org and a user, so the org has to
supercede the user permission with a negative permission.
# Use case
Organizations must be able to restrict a member's ability to create a
workspace. This permission is implicitly granted (see
https://github.com/coder/coder/issues/16546#issuecomment-2655437860).
To revoke this permission, the solution chosen was to use negative
permissions in a built in role called `WorkspaceCreationBan`.
# Rational
Using negative permissions is new territory, and not ideal. However,
workspaces are in a unique position.
Workspaces have 2 owners. The organization and the user. To prevent
users from creating a workspace in another organization, an [implied
negative
permission](36d9f5ddb3/coderd/rbac/policy.rego (L172-L192))
is used. So the truth table looks like: _how to read this table
[here](36d9f5ddb3/coderd/rbac/README.md (roles))_
| Role (example) | Site | Org | User | Result |
|-----------------|------|------|------|--------|
| non-org-member | \_ | N | YN\_ | N |
| user | \_ | \_ | Y | Y |
| WorkspaceBan | \_ | N | Y | Y |
| unauthenticated | \_ | \_ | \_ | N |
This new role, `WorkspaceCreationBan` is the same truth table condition
as if the user was not a member of the organization (when doing a
workspace create/delete). So this behavior **is not entirely new**.
<details>
<summary>How to do it without a negative permission</summary>
The alternate approach would be to remove the implied permission, and
grant it via and organization role. However this would add new behavior
that an organizational role has the ability to grant a user permissions
on their own resources?
It does not make sense for an org role to prevent user from changing
their profile information for example. So the only option is to create a
new truth table column for resources that are owned by both an
organization and a user.
| Role (example) | Site | Org |User+Org| User | Result |
|-----------------|------|------|--------|------|--------|
| non-org-member | \_ | N | \_ | \_ | N |
| user | \_ | \_ | \_ | \_ | N |
| WorkspaceAllow | \_ | \_ | Y | \_ | Y |
| unauthenticated | \_ | \_ | \_ | \_ | N |
Now a user has no opinion on if they can create a workspace, which feels
a little wrong. A user should have the authority over what is theres.
There is fundamental _philosophical_ question of "Who does a workspace
belong to?". The user has some set of autonomy, yet it is the
organization that controls it's existence. A head scratcher 🤔
</details>
## Will we need more negative built in roles?
There are few resources that have shared ownership. Only
`ResourceOrganizationMember` and `ResourceGroupMember`. Since negative
permissions is intended to revoke access to a shared resource, then
**no.** **This is the only one we need**.
Classic resources like `ResourceTemplate` are entirely controlled by the
Organization permissions. And resources entirely in the user control
(like user profile) are only controlled by `User` permissions.
![Uploading Screenshot 2025-02-26 at 22.26.52.png…]()
---------
Co-authored-by: Jaayden Halko <jaayden.halko@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: ケイラ <mckayla@hey.com>
`ServeProvisionerDaemonRequest` has had an ID field for quite a while
now.
This field is only used for telemetry purposes; the actual daemon ID is
created upon insertion in the database. There's no reason to set it, and
it's confusing to do so. Deprecating the field and removing references
to it.
Provisioner key permissions were never any different than provisioners.
Merging them for a cleaner permission story until they are required (if
ever) to be seperate.
This removed `ResourceProvisionerKey` from RBAC and just uses the
existing `ResourceProvisioner`.
- Add deleted column to organizations table
- Add trigger to check for existing workspaces, templates, groups and
members in a org before allowing the soft delete
---------
Co-authored-by: Steven Masley <stevenmasley@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Steven Masley <Emyrk@users.noreply.github.com>
Underscores and double hyphens are now blocked. The regex is almost the
exact same as the `coder_app` `slug` regex, but uppercase characters are
still permitted.
This change adds provisioner daemon ID filter to the provisioner daemons
endpoint, and also implements the limiting to 50 results.
Test coverage is greatly improved and template information for jobs
associated to the daemon was also fixed.
Updates #15084
Updates #15192
Related #16532
Addresses https://github.com/coder/internal/issues/317.
## Changes
Requirements are quoted below:
> how many orgs does deployment have
Adds the Organization entity to telemetry.
> ensuring resources are associated with orgs
All resources that reference an org already report the org id to
telemetry. Adds a test to check that.
> whether org sync is configured
Adds the `IDPOrgSync` boolean field to the Deployment entity.
## Implementation of the org sync check
While there's an `OrganizationSyncEnabled` method on the IDPSync
interface, I decided not to use it directly and implemented a
counterpart just for telemetry purposes. It's a compromise I'm not happy
about, but I found that it's a simpler approach than the alternative.
There are multiple reasons:
1. The telemetry package cannot statically access the IDPSync interface
due to a circular import.
2. We can't dynamically pass a reference to the
`OrganizationSyncEnabled` function at the time of instantiating the
telemetry object, because our server initialization logic depends on the
telemetry object being created before the IDPSync object.
3. If we circumvent that problem by passing the reference as an
initially empty pointer, initializing telemetry, then IDPSync, then
updating the pointer to point to `OrganizationSyncEnabled`, we have to
refactor the initialization logic of the telemetry object itself to
avoid a race condition where the first telemetry report is performed
without a valid reference.
I actually implemented that approach in
https://github.com/coder/coder/pull/16307, but realized I'm unable to
fully test it. It changed the initialization order in the server
command, and I wanted to test our CLI with Org Sync configured with a
premium license. As far as I'm aware, we don't have the tooling to do
that. I couldn't figure out a way to start the CLI with a mock license,
and I didn't want to go down further into the refactoring rabbit hole.
So I decided that reimplementing the org sync checking logic is simpler.
* chore(docs): update docs re workspace tag default values
* chore(coderdenttest): use random name instead of t.Name() in newExternalProvisionerDaemon
* fix(provisioner/terraform/tfparse): allow empty values in coder_workspace_tag defaults
Template `use` is now a verb.
- Template admins can `use` all templates (org template admins same in
org)
- Members get the `use` perm from the `everyone` group in the
`group_acl`.
This PR switches the order of precedence of workspace tags when posting
a template version.
Previously, user-specified tags in the request could not override those
detected from our parsing of the template file. Now, they can do.
This addresses a customer issue where were attempting to set a workspace
tag via variable.
Note: there is a possible follow-up item here where we could pass in the
workspace tag values from the request into `tfparse` and let it take
those user-specified values into account. This is covered in a separate
test.
- Adds `testutil.GoleakOptions` and consolidates existing options to
this location
- Pre-emptively adds required ignore for this Dependabot PR to pass CI
https://github.com/coder/coder/pull/16066
* Improves tfparse test coverage to include more parameter types and values
* Adds tests with unrelated parameters that should be ignored by tfparse
* Modifies tfparse to only attempt evaluation of parameters referenced by coder_workspace_tags
Migrates us to `coder/websocket` v1.8.12 rather than `nhooyr/websocket` on an older version.
Works around https://github.com/coder/websocket/issues/504 by adding an explicit test for `xerrors.Is(err, io.EOF)` where we were previously getting `io.EOF` from the netConn.
Relates to https://github.com/coder/coder/issues/15894:
- Adds `coderdenttest.NewExternalProvisionerDaemonTerraform`
- Adds integration-style test coverage for creating a workspace with
`coder_workspace_tags` specified in `main.tf`
- Modifies `coderd/wsbuilder` to fetch template version variables and
includes them in eval context for evaluating `coder_workspace_tags`
Relates to https://github.com/coder/coder/issues/15390
Currently when a user creates a workspace, their workspace's TTL is
determined by the template's default TTL. If the Coder instance is AGPL,
or if the template has disallowed the user from configuring autostop,
then it is not possible to change the workspace's TTL after creation.
Any changes to the template's default TTL only takes effect on _new_
workspaces.
This PR modifies the behaviour slightly so that on AGPL Coder, or on
enterprise when a template does not allow user's to configure their
workspace's TTL, updating the template's default TTL will also update
any workspace's TTL to match this value.
Fixes https://github.com/coder/internal/issues/238
It appears we haven't got quartz piped through to enough of Coder for
the test to work as I had expected. Using the current time should be
sufficient for this test.
Relates to https://github.com/coder/coder/issues/15082
Further to https://github.com/coder/coder/pull/15429, this reduces the
amount of false-positives returned by the 'is eligible for autostart'
part of the query. We achieve this by calculating the 'next start at'
time of the workspace, storing it in the database, and using it in our
`GetWorkspacesEligibleForTransition` query.
The prior implementation of the 'is eligible for autostart' query would
return _all_ workspaces that at some point in the future _might_ be
eligible for autostart. This now ensures we only return workspaces that
_should_ be eligible for autostart.
We also now pass `currentTick` instead of `t` to the
`GetWorkspacesEligibleForTransition` query as otherwise we'll have one
round of workspaces that are skipped by `isEligibleForTransition` due to
`currentTick` being a truncated version of `t`.
