If we use the owners mount point this results in null. And then the rest
of the checks get called with null. Which doesn't work.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
When "send password by Talk" was disabled in a mail share it was
possible to keep the same password as before, as it does not pose any
security issue (unlike keeping it when "send password by Talk" is
enabled, as in that case the password was already disclosed by mail).
However, if a mail share is updated but the password is not set again
only the hashed password will be available. In that case it would not
make sense to send the password by mail, so now the password must be
changed when disabling "send password by Talk".
Note that, even if explicitly setting the same password again along with
the "send password by Talk" property would work, this was also prevented
for simplicity.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When "send password by Talk" is enabled in a mail share a new password
must be also set. However, when the passwords of the original and the
new share were compared it was not taken into account that the original
password is now hashed, while the new one is not (unless no new password
was sent, in which case the password of the original share was set in
the new share by the controller, but that was already prevented due to
both passwords being literally the same), so it was possible to set the
same password again.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When "send password by Talk" is enabled in a link share now a non empty
password is enforced.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
To continue this formatting madness, here's a tiny patch that adds
unified formatting for control structures like if and loops as well as
classes, their methods and anonymous functions. This basically forces
the constructs to start on the same line. This is not exactly what PSR2
wants, but I think we can have a few exceptions with "our" style. The
starting of braces on the same line is pracrically standard for our
code.
This also removes and empty lines from method/function bodies at the
beginning and end.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Wurst <christoph@winzerhof-wurst.at>
* Order the imports
* No leading slash on imports
* Empty line before namespace
* One line per import
* Empty after imports
* Emmpty line at bottom of file
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
Sometimes we need all shares or rather a specific subset of shares but
creating dedicated functions is a pain. This just returns an iterable
object for all shares so we can loop over them without allocating all
the memory on the system.
It should not be used by any user called code. But in an occ command or
background job it is fine IMO.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
Since federated shares have their permissions set on the node, we do not need
to check for parent share permissions. Otherwise reshares of incoming federated
have no permission variable defined and creating them will fail
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
If a file is on external storage there is no owner. WHich means we can't
check. So just return an empty array then.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
log the error in case a notification mail of a new share couldn't
be send to the recipient and finish the share operation successfully
Signed-off-by: Bjoern Schiessle <bjoern@schiessle.org>
Tokens will be used to give access to a share to guests in public rooms.
Although the token itself is created in the provider of room shares and
no changes are needed for that, due to the code structure it is
necessary to explicitly call the provider from the manager when getting
a room share by token.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
Room shares are implemented in an external app (Nextcloud Talk), so in
order to keep the share manager as isolated as possible from room share
specifics all the validity checks are done in the provider of room
shares. However, due to the code structure it is necessary to explicitly
check for room shares in "generalCreateChecks" to prevent an exception
from being thrown.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When a password was set for a mail share an e-mail was sent to the
recipient with the password. Now the e-mail is no longer sent if the
password is meant to be sent by Talk.
However, before the e-mail was not sent when the share was updated but
the password was not changed. Now an e-mail is sent in that case too if
switching from a password sent by Talk to a password sent by mail.
On the other hand, when switching from a password sent by mail to a
password sent by Talk it is mandatory to change the password; otherwise
the recipient would already have access to the share without having to
call the sharer to verify her identity.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
When a group share is deleted we keep track of this in the DB.
Right now it is only possible for a recipient to get back the share by
asking the sharer to delete it and to share it again. This doesn't
scale.
This endpoint makes it possible to get back the share.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
Otherwise its a normal string[] with the user ids, in that
case the array_merge did it's job just fine, apart from it
not being deduplicated.
The array+array is only needed when the user id is the key,
so integer only user ids are kept as they are instead of being
reindexed.
Regression from 3820d6883d
Signed-off-by: Joas Schilling <coding@schilljs.com>
This adds back the support for `\OCP\Share\IShare::getMailSend`, one example is creating bulk shares via API which where previously blocking due to the share notification emails.
Signed-off-by: Lukas Reschke <lukas@statuscode.ch>
* introduce a Controller for requests
* introduce result sorting mechanism
* extend Comments to retrieve commentors (actors) in a tree
* add commenters sorter
* add share recipients sorter
Signed-off-by: Arthur Schiwon <blizzz@arthur-schiwon.de>
Basically we did in almost all cases did a query to much.
This resulted in an extra query for each share type.
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
* Now listeners for those events get proper share objects.
* Legacy hooks still fired
* Updated tests
Signed-off-by: Roeland Jago Douma <roeland@famdouma.nl>
This is broken and will never work as the phan CI step pointed out.
Pro-tip of the day: Check why CI fails before merging 🙈
Signed-off-by: Lukas Reschke <lukas@statuscode.ch>
- This kind of hook signal used to be emitted in the old Share library but it was missing from Share 2.0
Signed-off-by: Pauli Järvinen <pauli.jarvinen@gmail.com>
If getShareType() returns "email" it can not also return "user", "group"
nor "link", so the if block can be added to the preceding if chain.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
The plain text password for a shared links was hashed and, then, the
hashed password was hashed again and set as the final password. Due to
this the password introduced in the "Authenticate" page for the shared
link was always a wrong password, and thus the file could not be
accessed.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Calviño Sánchez <danxuliu@gmail.com>
