Auth using EF #14
Auth using EF #14
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes in this pull request involve significant updates to the Argon API project, including modifications to workflow triggers, the addition of a Docker Compose file, and the introduction of new entities and controllers. Key alterations include the restructuring of project files, the introduction of user and server management functionalities, and enhancements to the JWT authentication process. Additionally, several files were deleted, and formatting improvements were made across various components to enhance code readability. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
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 (
|
Reorganized user management by introducing a new UserAuthorizationManager class, moving user creation, authorization, and query methods from UserManager. Updated interfaces and corresponding controller actions to reflect these changes for better modularity and scalability.
Enhanced user authorization flow with email, phone number, and OTP support. Refactored JWT generation to require email instead of username and introduced configurations through IOptions. Improved user registration by adding Gravatar support and made various other code cleanups and optimizations.
urumo
force-pushed
the
feature/new-auth
branch
from
e1c8dc5 to
1891202
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 72
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (61)
src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationDbContext.cs (2)
7-9: LGTM! Consider marking DbSet properties as required.The DbSet properties for Users, Servers, and Channels are correctly defined. Consider adding the
requiredkeyword to explicitly indicate non-nullable properties.- public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; } - public DbSet<Server> Servers { get; set; } - public DbSet<Channel> Channels { get; set; } + public required DbSet<User> Users { get; set; } + public required DbSet<Server> Servers { get; set; } + public required DbSet<Channel> Channels { get; set; }
4-11: Consider adding entity configurations.The context would benefit from explicit relationship configurations using the OnModelCreating method. This helps ensure data integrity and proper relationship mapping.
Add this configuration:
protected override void OnModelCreating(ModelBuilder modelBuilder) { base.OnModelCreating(modelBuilder); modelBuilder.Entity<UsersToServerRelation>() .HasKey(uts => new { uts.UserId, uts.ServerId }); modelBuilder.Entity<UsersToServerRelation>() .HasOne(uts => uts.User) .WithMany() .HasForeignKey(uts => uts.UserId); modelBuilder.Entity<UsersToServerRelation>() .HasOne(uts => uts.Server) .WithMany() .HasForeignKey(uts => uts.ServerId); modelBuilder.Entity<Channel>() .HasOne(c => c.Server) .WithMany(s => s.Channels) .HasForeignKey(c => c.ServerId); }src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs (2)
5-6: Add XML documentation for the public API.Consider adding XML documentation to describe the purpose and usage of this security-critical class.
+/// <summary> +/// Provides cryptographically secure random number generation utilities. +/// </summary> public static class SecureRandom
15-15: Consider using string interpolation for better performance.The current string manipulation can be optimized.
- return BitConverter.ToString(buffer).Replace("-", "").ToLower(); + return string.Create(n * 2, buffer, (chars, bytes) => + { + for (int i = 0; i < bytes.Length; i++) + { + byte b = bytes[i]; + chars[i * 2] = HexChar(b >> 4); + chars[i * 2 + 1] = HexChar(b & 0xF); + } + }); + + static char HexChar(int value) => (char)(value < 10 ? '0' + value : 'a' + (value - 10));This approach:
- Avoids intermediate string allocations
- Eliminates the need for string replacement
- Performs better for larger inputs
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UsersJoinedToChannel.cs (2)
8-13: Consider documenting the need for multiple serialization frameworks.While supporting multiple serialization frameworks provides flexibility, it increases maintenance overhead. Please add XML documentation to explain the specific use case for each serialization framework.
1-19: Add XML documentation for the record.Since this is a persistence state class that seems central to channel management, please add XML documentation explaining its purpose, usage, and any important considerations.
Add documentation like this:
+/// <summary> +/// Represents the persistent state of users joined to a channel. +/// This state is used by the channel manager to track channel membership. +/// </summary> [DataContract] [MemoryPackable(GenerateType.VersionTolerant)] [MessagePackObject] [Serializable] [GenerateSerializer] public sealed partial record UsersJoinedToChannelsrc/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectIdAttribute.cs (1)
5-7: Add XML documentation for better maintainability.The attribute's purpose and usage should be documented for better maintainability.
+/// <summary> +/// Injects the authenticated user's ID from claims into the action method's "id" parameter. +/// </summary> +/// <remarks> +/// This attribute should be applied to controller action methods that require the current user's ID. +/// The ID is extracted from the "id" claim and injected into the action's parameters. +/// </remarks> [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method)] public class InjectIdAttribute : ActionFilterAttributesrc/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/ISessionManager.cs (1)
9-10: Consider adding rate limiting for authorization attempts.The
Authorizemethod should be protected against brute force attacks. Consider implementing rate limiting at the grain level or adding a parameter for tracking failed attempts.src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs (1)
16-28: Consider adding a security comment and optimize hex conversion.While MD5 is cryptographically broken, it's the required algorithm for Gravatar. Consider adding a comment explaining this. Also, the hex conversion can be optimized.
Here's the suggested implementation:
private static string GetMd5Hash(string input) { + // Note: MD5 is used here as per Gravatar's requirements, not for security purposes using var md5 = MD5.Create(); var inputBytes = Encoding.ASCII.GetBytes(input); var hashBytes = md5.ComputeHash(inputBytes); - var sb = new StringBuilder(); - foreach (var t in hashBytes) - { - sb.Append(t.ToString("x2")); - } - - return sb.ToString(); + return Convert.ToHexString(hashBytes).ToLowerInvariant(); }src/Argon.Api/appsettings.Development.json (1)
Line range hint
1-17: Security Risk: Sensitive credentials exposed in source controlThe configuration file contains multiple sensitive credentials and keys that should not be committed to source control:
- Database credentials
- RabbitMQ credentials
- JWT signing key
Consider:
- Moving sensitive values to environment variables or a secure vault
- Using placeholder values in the development settings
- Adding this file to .gitignore
Example safer configuration:
{ "ConnectionStrings": { - "DefaultConnection": "Host=localhost;Port=5432;Username=svck;Password=Password123;Database=apiDb", + "DefaultConnection": "Host=localhost;Port=5432;Username=${DB_USER};Password=${DB_PASSWORD};Database=apiDb", - "rmq": "amqp://svck:Password123@localhost:5672" + "rmq": "amqp://${RMQ_USER}:${RMQ_PASSWORD}@localhost:5672" }, "Jwt": { "Issuer": "Argon", "Audience": "Argon", - "Key": "5d456e57b6fad40e2d171ffdb4535116596c3b543bf8cfafe6369845cf86a801", + "Key": "${JWT_KEY}", "Expires": 228 } }🧰 Tools
🪛 Gitleaks
16-16: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs (1)
28-34: Enhance the record definition with validation and documentation.The record could benefit from input validation and clear documentation of its purpose and property usage.
Consider this enhancement:
+ /// <summary> + /// Represents the configuration metadata returned by the API. + /// </summary> public record HeadRoutingConfig( - string version, - string masterEndpoint, - string webRtcEndpoint, - List<RegionalNode> cdnAddresses, - List<FeatureFlag> features + [Required] + string version, + + [Required] + [Url] + string masterEndpoint, + + [Required] + [Url] + string webRtcEndpoint, + + [Required] + IReadOnlyList<RegionalNode> cdnAddresses, + + [Required] + IReadOnlyList<FeatureFlag> features );src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs (1)
7-7: Remove unused constantDefaultUserNameThe constant
DefaultUserName = "guest"is defined but never used in the code.- private const string DefaultUserName = "guest";src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs (2)
20-20: Consider documenting the authentication flows.The change to make
usernameandmachineKeynullable while keepingpasswordrequired suggests multiple authentication flows. Consider adding XML documentation to clarify:
- When username can be null (e.g., email-only auth)
- The purpose and usage of machineKey
Also applies to: 28-29
33-36: Consider standardizing phone number format.Since
phoneNumberis being introduced, consider:
- Adding a comment or attribute specifying the expected format (e.g., E.164)
- Documenting whether this is intended for 2FA/MFA
src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs (5)
9-12: Add XML documentation for public members.Consider adding XML documentation to describe the middleware's purpose and its constructor parameters.
+/// <summary> +/// Middleware that handles RPC authorization using Fusion sessions. +/// </summary> public class FusionAuthorizationMiddleware(IServiceProvider Services, IGrainFactory GrainFactory) : RpcInboundMiddleware(Services)
12-12: Consider reducing Token field visibility.The Token field is currently public but doesn't appear to need this level of access. Consider making it protected or private to encapsulate implementation details.
- public AsyncLocal<string> Token = new(); + protected AsyncLocal<string> Token = new();
Line range hint
14-33: Improve error handling and provide better feedback for unauthorized calls.The current implementation has several areas for improvement:
- No exception handling for grain operations
- Silent cancellation without error context
- No logging of authorization failures
Consider implementing this improved version:
public override async Task OnBeforeCall(RpcInboundCall call) { var existAttribute = call.MethodDef.Method.GetAttributes<AuthorizeAttribute>(true, true).Count != 0; if (!existAttribute) { await base.OnBeforeCall(call); return; } - var grain = GrainFactory.GetGrain<IFusionSession>(call.Context.Peer.Id); - - var state = await grain.GetState(); - if (state.IsAuthorized) - { - await base.OnBeforeCall(call); - return; - } - - call.Cancel(); + try + { + var grain = GrainFactory.GetGrain<IFusionSession>(call.Context.Peer.Id); + var state = await grain.GetState(); + + if (state.IsAuthorized) + { + await base.OnBeforeCall(call); + return; + } + + call.Cancel(new UnauthorizedAccessException("Session is not authorized")); + } + catch (Exception ex) + { + call.Cancel(new InvalidOperationException("Failed to verify authorization", ex)); + } }
Line range hint
35-49: Enhance FusionServiceContext with better error handling and cancellation support.The context implementation could be improved with proper documentation, error handling, and cancellation support.
Consider implementing these improvements:
+/// <summary> +/// Provides access to the current Fusion session state. +/// </summary> public class FusionServiceContext(IGrainFactory GrainFactory) : IFusionServiceContext { - public ValueTask<FusionSession> GetSessionState() + public async ValueTask<FusionSession> GetSessionState(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default) { var current = RpcInboundContext.GetCurrent(); + if (current == null) + throw new InvalidOperationException("No active RPC context found"); + var peerId = current.Peer.Id; var grain = GrainFactory.GetGrain<IFusionSession>(peerId); - - return grain.GetState(); + try + { + return await grain.GetState().WaitAsync(cancellationToken); + } + catch (Exception ex) when (ex is not OperationCanceledException) + { + throw new InvalidOperationException("Failed to retrieve session state", ex); + } } } +/// <summary> +/// Defines operations for accessing Fusion session state. +/// </summary> public interface IFusionServiceContext { - ValueTask<FusionSession> GetSessionState(); + ValueTask<FusionSession> GetSessionState(CancellationToken cancellationToken = default); }
Line range hint
9-49: Consider adding logging support for better observability.The authorization middleware handles critical security functionality. Adding logging would improve debugging and monitoring capabilities, especially for production environments.
Consider injecting ILogger and adding logging for:
- Authorization failures
- Session state retrieval errors
- Unauthorized access attempts
src/Argon.Api/Program.cs (1)
42-42: Consider enhancing the root endpoint response.While the version information is useful, consider adding:
-app.MapGet("/", () => new { version = $"{GlobalVersion.FullSemVer}.{GlobalVersion.ShortSha}" }); +app.MapGet("/", () => new { + version = $"{GlobalVersion.FullSemVer}.{GlobalVersion.ShortSha}", + status = "healthy", + environment = app.Environment.EnvironmentName +});docker-compose.yaml (3)
1-58: Add resource constraints for servicesNo memory or CPU limits are defined for any service. This could lead to resource exhaustion in production.
Add deploy constraints for each service:
cache: image: "docker.io/library/redis:7.4" + deploy: + resources: + limits: + memory: 512M + reservations: + memory: 256M
54-58: Consider naming convention for volumesThe volume names are inconsistent: some use 'apphost' prefix while others don't. Consider standardizing the naming convention.
volumes: apphost-rmq-data: { } apphost-pg-data: { } - clickhouse-data: { } - logs: { } + apphost-clickhouse-data: { } + apphost-clickhouse-logs: { }
1-58: Add health checks for service dependenciesConsider adding health checks to ensure services are ready before dependent services start.
Example for PostgreSQL:
pg: image: "docker.io/library/postgres:16.4" + healthcheck: + test: ["CMD-SHELL", "pg_isready -U svck"] + interval: 10s + timeout: 5s + retries: 5src/AppHost/Program.cs (1)
Line range hint
1-48: Consider implementing a configuration management strategy.The application contains multiple sensitive configuration values (database credentials, JWT keys, SFU credentials). Consider:
- Implementing a secrets management solution
- Using configuration validation at startup
- Implementing a configuration abstraction layer
Would you like assistance in implementing a secure configuration management pattern?
src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs (3)
16-17: Use ICollection instead of List for navigation properties.Using ICollection provides better abstraction and is the recommended practice for Entity Framework navigation properties.
- public List<Channel> Channels { get; set; } = new(); - public List<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; set; } = new(); + public ICollection<Channel> Channels { get; set; } = new List<Channel>(); + public ICollection<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; set; } = new List<UsersToServerRelation>();
72-72: Align DTO property name with entity.The property name 'Users' in ServerDto doesn't match the corresponding entity property 'UsersToServerRelations', which could lead to confusion.
- List<UsersToServerRelationDto> Users + List<UsersToServerRelationDto> UsersToServerRelations
8-9: Add XML documentation for public types.Both Server and ServerDto are public types and should have XML documentation to improve API documentation and IDE support.
+/// <summary> +/// Represents a server entity in the system. +/// </summary> public sealed record Server +/// <summary> +/// Data transfer object for server information. +/// </summary> public sealed partial record ServerDtoAlso applies to: 34-40
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs (3)
Line range hint
15-41: Simplify method signature and implement proper error handlingThe method doesn't perform any async operations but is marked as async. Additionally, the error handling needs improvement.
- Remove async wrapper:
- public Task<string> GenerateJwt(string email, Guid id) + public string GenerateJwt(string email, Guid id) { var (issuer, audience, key, exp) = jwt.Value; // ... rest of the method ... - return Task.FromResult(jwtToken); + return jwtToken; }
- Consider creating a custom exception type for token generation failures:
public class TokenGenerationException : Exception { public TokenGenerationException(string message) : base(message) { } }
Line range hint
43-74: Refactor validation methods for better maintainability and error handlingThe validation methods have several areas for improvement:
- They're unnecessarily async
- Password validation could be more robust
- Error handling needs standardization
Consider this refactoring:
- public async Task Validate(string username, string password) + public void Validate(string username, string password) { - await ValidateLength(username, nameof(username), 3, 50); - await ValidateLength(password, nameof(password), 8, 32); - await ValidatePasswordStrength(password); + ValidateLength(username, nameof(username), 3, 50); + ValidateLength(password, nameof(password), 8, 32); + ValidatePasswordStrength(password); } - private Task ValidatePasswordStrength(string password) + private static void ValidatePasswordStrength(string password) { - if (!password.Any(char.IsDigit)) - throw new Exception("Password must contain at least one digit"); + var requirements = new[] + { + (password.Any(char.IsDigit), "Password must contain at least one digit"), + (password.Any(char.IsUpper), "Password must contain at least one uppercase letter"), + (password.Any(char.IsLower), "Password must contain at least one lowercase letter") + }; + + var failures = requirements + .Where(req => !req.Item1) + .Select(req => req.Item2) + .ToList(); + + if (failures.Any()) + throw new ValidationException(string.Join(", ", failures)); - // ... rest of the checks ... - return Task.CompletedTask; } - private Task ValidateLength(string str, string obj, int min, int max) + private static void ValidateLength(string str, string obj, int min, int max) { if (str.Length < min || str.Length > max) - throw new Exception($"{obj}: Invalid length"); - return Task.CompletedTask; + throw new ValidationException( + $"{obj} length must be between {min} and {max} characters"); }
15-22: Enhance JWT security with additional claimsConsider adding these security-enhancing claims to the JWT:
jti(JWT ID) for token uniquenessiat(Issued At) for token age trackingnbf(Not Before) for token activation controlvar subject = new ClaimsIdentity([ new Claim("id", id.ToString()), - new Claim("email", email) + new Claim("email", email), + new Claim("jti", Guid.NewGuid().ToString()), + new Claim("iat", DateTimeOffset.UtcNow.ToUnixTimeSeconds().ToString()), + new Claim("nbf", DateTimeOffset.UtcNow.ToUnixTimeSeconds().ToString()) ]);src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs (1)
38-44: Consider simplifying serialization strategy.The current implementation uses multiple serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, MessagePack) which might lead to:
- Increased maintenance overhead
- Potential inconsistencies between different serialization methods
- Larger binary size due to multiple serialization attributes
Consider standardizing on a single serialization framework based on your primary use case:
- MessagePack for binary serialization
- DataContract for XML/JSON interoperability
- MemoryPack for high-performance .NET-specific scenarios
src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs (2)
8-13: Add explicit values and documentation to enum.Consider adding explicit values and XML documentation to improve maintainability and prevent serialization issues if the enum order changes.
+/// <summary> +/// Defines the type of a channel within the system. +/// </summary> public enum ChannelType : ushort { - Text, - Voice, - Announcement + /// <summary>Text-based communication channel.</summary> + Text = 0, + /// <summary>Voice-based communication channel.</summary> + Voice = 1, + /// <summary>Announcement-only channel.</summary> + Announcement = 2 }
43-92: Add validation and documentation to DTO.The DTO should include validation attributes to ensure data integrity before mapping to entities, and XML documentation for API consumers.
[DataContract] [MemoryPackable(GenerateType.VersionTolerant)] [MessagePackObject] [Serializable] [GenerateSerializer] [Alias(nameof(ChannelDto))] +/// <summary> +/// Data transfer object representing a channel in the system. +/// </summary> public sealed partial record ChannelDto( [property: DataMember(Order = 0)] [property: MemoryPackOrder(0)] [property: Id(0)] Guid Id, // ... other properties ... [property: DataMember(Order = 3)] [property: MemoryPackOrder(3)] [property: Id(3)] + [property: MaxLength(255)] + [property: Required] string Name, [property: DataMember(Order = 4)] [property: MemoryPackOrder(4)] [property: Id(4)] + [property: MaxLength(255)] string Description, // ... remaining properties ... )Also, consider adding a warning comment about potential serialization conflicts:
// Note: Multiple serialization frameworks are used (MemoryPack, MessagePack, DataContract). // Ensure all frameworks maintain consistent behavior, especially for null handling and enum serialization.src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs (1)
17-18: Implement automatic UpdatedAt maintenance.The UpdatedAt property should be automatically updated when the entity is modified.
Consider implementing IEntityTypeConfiguration to configure automatic updates:
public class UsersToServerRelationConfiguration : IEntityTypeConfiguration<UsersToServerRelation> { public void Configure(EntityTypeBuilder<UsersToServerRelation> builder) { builder.Property(x => x.UpdatedAt) .HasDefaultValue(DateTime.UtcNow) .ValueGeneratedOnUpdate(); } }src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs (2)
97-97: Consider pagination for the Channels property.The change from
List<Guid>toList<ServerDetailsResponse>provides more data upfront but could impact performance for servers with many channels. Consider:
- Adding pagination support to prevent large payload sizes
- Using lazy loading or separate endpoint for detailed channel data
Line range hint
97-106: Consider implementing user status tracking.The TODO comment indicates missing user status tracking. Given this PR's focus on authentication ("Auth using EF"), this would be an appropriate time to implement user status tracking.
Suggested approach:
- Add a UserStatus enum (Online, Offline, InChannel)
- Add a List property to ServerResponse
Would you like me to:
- Generate the UserStatus enum implementation?
- Update the ServerResponse record with user status tracking?
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241104210028_Init.cs (1)
1-144: Consider additional architectural improvements.Several architectural considerations for future migrations:
- Add soft delete for Servers (similar to Users.DeletedAt)
- Add audit fields for ban/mute actions (who performed the action)
- Consider adding version/concurrency control (e.g., xmin or RowVersion)
- Consider adding created_by/updated_by fields for audit trails
Would you like me to provide a follow-up migration script implementing these improvements?
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241104210028_Init.Designer.cs (2)
28-68: Consider adding indexes for performance and uniqueness constraints.The Channel entity configuration could benefit from:
- An index on
UserIdfor efficient queries by user- A unique composite index on
(ServerId, Name)to prevent duplicate channel names within the same server
69-98: Consider adding owner relationship and name uniqueness.The Server entity could benefit from:
- An
OwnerIdforeign key to track server ownership- A unique index on
Nameif server names should be globally uniquesrc/Argon.Api/Services/UserAuthorization.cs (1)
10-10: Nested comment and unresolved TODO:machineKeyLine 10 contains a nested comment
// // TODO machineKey. The double//is redundant. Also, please address the TODO by implementing themachineKeyfunctionality as needed.Do you want assistance in implementing the
machineKeyfunctionality or creating a GitHub issue to track this task?src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs (1)
Line range hint
1-38: Consider adding more granular authorization checks.The current implementation relies on the
[Authorize]attribute for authorization. However, it might be beneficial to add more granular authorization checks within the action methods themselves. For example, you could verify that the user making the request has the necessary permissions to perform the specific action.Here's an example of how you could add granular authorization checks:
[HttpGet("Me")] [Authorize] [InjectId] public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) { var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id)); var user = await userManager.GetUser(); // Check if the user has the necessary permissions if (!user.HasPermission("ViewProfile")) { return Forbid(); } return user; }src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (1)
3-6: Review the necessity and organization of added using directivesThe added
usingstatements seem to introduce namespaces for serialization and entity handling:
System.Runtime.SerializationEntitiesMemoryPackMessagePackPlease verify that all these namespaces are required. Additionally, consider organizing the
usingdirectives according to the project's conventions for maintainability.src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs (2)
41-44: Clarify usage of both [HttpPut] and [HttpPatch] attributesThe
UpdateChannelmethod (lines 41-44) is decorated with both[HttpPut]and[HttpPatch]attributes. While it's acceptable to handle both HTTP verbs with the same method, typicallyPUTis used for full updates andPATCHfor partial updates. Ensure that the method correctly handles both scenarios or consider separating them if different handling is required.
18-47: Add authorization checks for user actionsWhile the
[Authorize]attribute secures the controller, the methodsJoin,Leave,GetChannel, andUpdateChanneldo not check whether the authenticated user has the right to perform these actions on the specifiedchannelId. Consider implementing authorization logic to validate that the user has access permissions for the channel.src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs (3)
35-38: Clarify the purpose of OTP generation after password verificationGenerating an OTP after successful password verification is unusual unless it's part of a multi-factor authentication (MFA) process. If MFA is intended, additional steps for OTP verification should be implemented. Otherwise, consider removing this step to simplify the authentication flow.
If MFA is required, ensure that:
- The OTP is sent to the user securely.
- There is a mechanism to verify the OTP before granting access.
- The authentication flow is clearly documented.
46-48: Implement theLogoutmethod or remove it if unnecessaryThe
Logoutmethod currently throws aNotImplementedException, which can cause runtime errors. If logout functionality is planned, please implement it. If not, consider removing or commenting out the method until it's ready to be implemented.Apply this diff if the method is not needed yet:
-public Task Logout() -{ - throw new NotImplementedException(); -} +// public Task Logout() +// { +// throw new NotImplementedException(); +// }Alternatively, implement the logout logic to properly invalidate the user's session.
16-39: Enhance code readability by separating concerns inAuthorizemethodThe
Authorizemethod handles multiple responsibilities: user retrieval, OTP generation, password verification, and JWT generation. Applying the Single Responsibility Principle can improve readability and maintainability.Consider refactoring the
Authorizemethod:
- Extract OTP generation logic into a separate private method.
- Separate password verification into its own method.
- Clarify the authentication flow by documenting each step.
Example:
public async Task<JwtToken> Authorize(UserCredentialsInput input) { var user = await GetUserByEmail(input.Email); if (user is null) throw new UserNotFoundException("User not found with given credentials"); if (input.GenerateOtp) { await GenerateAndSendOtp(user); return new OtpGeneratedResponse { Message = "OTP has been sent to your email." }; } VerifyPassword(input.Password, user); return await GenerateJwt(user); }Implement the extracted methods (
GetUserByEmail,GenerateAndSendOtp,VerifyPassword) accordingly.src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs (1)
59-63: Optimize eager loading to improve performance.The
Getmethod eagerly loadsUsersToServerRelations,Server, andChannels. This can fetch unnecessary data, impacting performance, especially if this method is called frequently.Consider loading only the necessary data:
return await context.Users - .Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations) - .ThenInclude(x => x.Server) - .ThenInclude(x => x.Channels) .FirstAsync(user => user.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());If related data is needed conditionally, you could create separate methods or use parameters to include related entities when required.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (3)
21-23: Optimize database query for user retrievalThe current LINQ query loads the entire
Serverentity along with its relations, which may be inefficient. Refactor to directly query theUsersToServerRelationstable to improve performance.Consider refactoring as follows:
- var user = (await context.Servers.Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations) - .FirstAsync(x => x.Id == channel.ServerId)) - .UsersToServerRelations.First(x => x.UserId == userId); + var user = await context.UsersToServerRelations + .FirstAsync(x => x.UserId == userId && x.ServerId == channel.ServerId);
34-34: Address the TODO regarding permissionsThe TODO comment indicates that permissions need to be sorted out. Proper permission handling is crucial for security.
Would you like assistance in implementing the appropriate permissions? I can help generate the necessary code or open a GitHub issue to track this task.
44-48: Improve method naming for clarityThe
GetChannelmethod calls another methodGet, which can be confusing due to generic naming.Consider renaming the
Getmethod to something more descriptive, likeGetChannelEntity, to improve code readability.src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (4)
46-46: Remove unnecessaryUpdatecall on tracked entity.Entity Framework Core automatically tracks changes to retrieved entities. Calling
context.Servers.Update(server);is unnecessary and can be omitted.Apply this diff to remove the unnecessary update call:
- context.Servers.Update(server);
68-68: Correct typo in channel description.The word "anouncements" is misspelled. It should be "announcements".
Apply this diff to fix the typo:
- CreateChannel(creatorId, "General", "General announcements channel", ChannelType.Announcement)
72-82: Adjust parameter naming and references inCreateChannelmethod.The parameter
CreatorIdshould be in camelCase (creatorId) to follow C# naming conventions. Update all references within the method accordingly.Apply this diff to update the parameter name and references:
-private Channel CreateChannel(Guid CreatorId, string name, string description, ChannelType channelType) +private Channel CreateChannel(Guid creatorId, string name, string description, ChannelType channelType) { return new Channel { Name = name, Description = description, - UserId = CreatorId, + UserId = creatorId, ChannelType = channelType, AccessLevel = ServerRole.User }; }
84-85: Rename theGetmethod for clarity and maintainability.The method name
Getis generic and might reduce code readability. Consider renaming it toGetServerByIdto clearly convey its purpose.Apply this diff to rename the method:
-private async Task<Server> Get() +private async Task<Server> GetServerById()Update all references to this method accordingly.
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/ApplicationDbContextModelSnapshot.cs (4)
1-1: Consider excluding auto-generated files from code reviewsThis file is auto-generated (
// <auto-generated />) by Entity Framework migrations. Including auto-generated files in code reviews can clutter the review process with low-value details. Consider excluding these files from the code review or adding them to.gitignoreif they do not need to be version-controlled.
163-166: Add maximum length constraint to 'CustomUsername'The
CustomUsernameproperty inUsersToServerRelationis required but lacks a maximum length constraint. To prevent excessively long usernames and potential database issues, consider adding a maximum length (e.g., 255 characters), aligning with other username fields.
102-105: Standardize 'AvatarUrl' property length across entitiesThe
AvatarUrlproperty has inconsistent maximum lengths:
Userentity (lines 102-105): Max length of 1023 characters.Serverentity (lines 72-75): Max length of 255 characters.UsersToServerRelation(lines 147-150): No maximum length specified (HasColumnType("text")).For consistency and to avoid potential issues with database storage and data validation, consider standardizing the maximum length of
AvatarUrlacross all entities.Also applies to: 72-75, 147-150
147-150: Re-evaluate the 'AvatarUrl' requirement in 'UsersToServerRelation'The
AvatarUrlproperty inUsersToServerRelationis marked as required (IsRequired()). Determine if it's necessary for every user-to-server relation to have anAvatarUrl. If not, consider making this property optional to accommodate cases where a custom avatar is not provided.src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs (2)
11-21: Add XML Documentation to Public Interface MethodsThe methods in the
IServerManagerinterface lack XML documentation comments. Providing summaries for these methods enhances readability and assists other developers in understanding their purpose and usage.Consider adding XML documentation:
/// <summary> /// Creates a new server with the specified input and creator ID. /// </summary> /// <param name="input">The server details.</param> /// <param name="creatorId">The ID of the creator.</param> /// <returns>The created server data transfer object.</returns> Task<ServerDto> CreateServer(ServerInput input, Guid creatorId);
3-6: Organize Using Directives for ClarityThe
usingdirectives include both general and project-specific namespaces. Organizing them can improve readability.Consider grouping and sorting the
usingstatements:using System.Runtime.Serialization; using MemoryPack; using MessagePack; using Entities;
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (60)
.github/workflows/api.yml(0 hunks)Argon.Server.sln(1 hunks)docker-compose.yaml(1 hunks)src/AppHost/AppHost.csproj(1 hunks)src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/AppHost/Program.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Argon.Api.csproj(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectIdAttribute.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectUsernameAttribute.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/OrleansPersistenceTestController.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ServersController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationDbContext.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationRecord.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Filters/InjectUsernameFilter.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IHello.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/ISessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ChannelStorage.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ChannelType.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/HelloArchive.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerChannelsStore.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerRole.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerStorage.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerToUserRelations.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserStorage.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserStorageDto.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserToServerRelation.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserToServerRelations.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UsersJoinedToChannel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/Hello.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241012001305_Init.Designer.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241012001305_Init.cs(0 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241104210028_Init.Designer.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241104210028_Init.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/ApplicationDbContextModelSnapshot.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Program.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserAuthorization.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs(3 hunks)src/Argon.Api/appsettings.Development.json(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (20)
- .github/workflows/api.yml
- src/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectUsernameAttribute.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/OrleansPersistenceTestController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationRecord.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Filters/InjectUsernameFilter.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IHello.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ChannelStorage.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ChannelType.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/HelloArchive.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerChannelsStore.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerRole.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerStorage.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/ServerToUserRelations.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserStorage.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserStorageDto.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserToServerRelation.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UserToServerRelations.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains/Hello.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241012001305_Init.Designer.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241012001305_Init.cs
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- src/Argon.Api/Argon.Api.csproj
- src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs
🔇 Additional comments (48)
src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs (1)
1-4: LGTM!
Clean namespace organization with minimal required imports.
src/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectIdAttribute.cs (3)
1-4: LGTM!
The namespace organization and imports are clean and appropriate.
8-14: Consider adding thread safety measures.
The modification of ActionArguments dictionary should be thread-safe to prevent potential race conditions in concurrent requests.
Let's verify if the ActionArguments dictionary is accessed concurrently:
Consider using a synchronization mechanism or ensuring that the dictionary is not shared across threads.
1-15: Verify integration with authentication middleware.
Ensure that this attribute works correctly with your authentication setup.
Let's verify the authentication configuration:
✅ Verification successful
JWT authentication is properly configured and the id claim is correctly set
The verification shows that:
- JWT Bearer authentication is properly configured with all necessary validations (issuer, audience, lifetime, signing key)
- The
idclaim is correctly set during token generation inUserManagerService.cs - The authentication middleware is properly registered in the pipeline with
app.UseAuthentication()
Therefore, the InjectIdAttribute will work correctly with the authentication setup as it relies on the standard claims principal, which is properly populated by the JWT authentication process.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for authentication setup in Program.cs or Startup.cs
fd -e cs -e json "Program|Startup|appsettings" -x rg -A 10 "AddAuthentication|Authentication"
# Check if the "id" claim is properly set during authentication
rg -A 5 "Claims.Add.*id"
Length of output: 420
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check for JWT or authentication handler configurations
rg -A 10 "JwtBearer|AuthenticationHandler|IAuthenticationHandler"
# Look for middleware that might be setting claims
rg -A 10 "ClaimsIdentity|ClaimsPrincipal"
# Check for any custom authentication-related classes
fd -e cs -x rg -l "class.*:.*Authentication|class.*:.*AuthHandler"
# Search for token validation parameters
rg "TokenValidationParameters"
Length of output: 5350
src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs (2)
1-6: LGTM! Clean and well-organized imports.
All necessary imports are present and properly organized.
7-8: LGTM! Appropriate use of static class.
The static class design is suitable for these utility methods.
src/AppHost/AppHost.csproj (1)
23-25: Review the necessity of including aspirate-output folder.
Including output directories directly in the project file is unusual. If this is for Aspire's output:
- Consider configuring this through application settings or environment variables
- Output paths are typically determined at runtime rather than build time
src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs (1)
8-8: Verify security measures for the public endpoint.
Let's verify if there are any security measures in place for this public endpoint.
✅ Verification successful
Public endpoint is properly marked with security attributes
The endpoint /cfg.json is explicitly marked with [AllowAnonymous] attribute, indicating this is an intentionally public endpoint. The application has proper security infrastructure in place:
- Authentication and Authorization middleware are configured in
Program.cs - HTTPS redirection is enabled
- The controller is decorated with
[ApiController]attribute - The endpoint returns only configuration data that appears to be intentionally public
Since this endpoint is designed to serve public configuration data and is explicitly marked as anonymous, there are no security concerns to address.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for rate limiting and security middleware implementations
# Check for rate limiting implementations
echo "Checking for rate limiting..."
rg -l "RateLimiting" --type cs
# Check for security middleware configuration
echo "Checking for security middleware..."
rg -l "app\.Use.*Security" --type cs
# Check for authentication setup in Program.cs or Startup.cs
echo "Checking for authentication configuration..."
fd -e cs -E "**/bin/**" -E "**/obj/**" "Program.cs|Startup.cs" -x rg -l "AddAuthentication|UseAuthentication"
Length of output: 457
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the Program.cs content and look for other security headers and middleware
echo "Checking Program.cs content..."
rg -A 10 -B 10 "UseAuthentication|AddAuthentication" src/Argon.Api/Program.cs
# Check for authorization attributes on the controller or specific endpoints
echo "Checking controller authorization..."
rg -l "Authorize" src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs
# Check for CORS, security headers, and other security middleware
echo "Checking for additional security configurations..."
rg "UseHsts|UseCors|UseHttpsRedirection" src/Argon.Api/Program.cs
# Check if the metadata endpoints have specific security attributes
echo "Checking MetadataController content..."
cat src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs
Length of output: 2437
src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs (2)
18-21: LGTM!
The properties are well-designed with appropriate immutability using init-only setters.
23-26: Verify connection string logging
Since the connection string contains sensitive credentials, ensure it's not accidentally exposed in logs.
✅ Verification successful
Let me check how this ConnectionStringExpression is used in Program.cs since that's the only other file referencing this class.
Based on the comprehensive analysis of the codebase, I can now provide the final response:
Connection string handling appears secure
The ConnectionStringExpression is only used as part of the resource configuration in the Aspire host project and is not logged anywhere in the codebase. The connection string is properly handled through:
- Parameterized credentials using
AddParameter - Secure environment variable injection
- No logging statements found that could expose the connection string
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for potential logging of connection strings
rg -i "log|trace|debug|info|warn|error|fatal" -A 5 "ConnectionStringExpression"
Length of output: 146
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any usage of ConnectionStringExpression in the codebase
rg -l "ConnectionStringExpression"
Length of output: 76
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for logging patterns in files containing ConnectionStringExpression
rg -i "log|trace|debug|info|warn|error|fatal" $(rg -l "ConnectionStringExpression")
Length of output: 125
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any string logging or printing patterns
ast-grep --pattern 'Console.Write($$$)'
ast-grep --pattern 'Console.WriteLine($$$)'
ast-grep --pattern '_logger.$_($$$)'
ast-grep --pattern 'ILogger.$_($$$)'
Length of output: 165
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the full content of the file to understand how ConnectionStringExpression is used
cat src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs
Length of output: 1292
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any references to this class across the codebase
rg -l "ClickhouseBuilderExtension"
Length of output: 99
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any logging configurations or usages in the codebase that might capture connection strings
rg -i "connection.*string" -A 3 -B 3
Length of output: 3440
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check how ConnectionStringExpression is used in Program.cs
cat src/AppHost/Program.cs
Length of output: 2018
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any logging middleware or configuration setup in the codebase
rg -i "addlogging|configurelogging|useserilog|uselogging" -A 5
Length of output: 64
src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs (2)
37-40: Review OTP security implications.
The generateOtp flag introduces OTP functionality. Ensure:
- OTP generation is rate-limited
- OTP delivery method (email/SMS) is properly secured
- OTP expiration is enforced
#!/bin/bash
# Look for rate limiting implementations
rg -A 10 "rate.*limit|throttle"
# Search for OTP-related security measures
rg -A 10 "otp.*expir|expir.*otp"29-32: Verify email validation requirements.
Since email is now a required non-nullable field and appears to be the primary identifier, ensure proper validation is implemented in the consuming services.
src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs (1)
1-7: LGTM! Using statements are well-organized.
The namespace organization and dependencies are appropriate for the middleware's functionality.
src/Argon.Api/Program.cs (2)
43-43: LGTM: Database warmup looks good.
The WarpUp<ApplicationDbContext>() ensures database migrations are applied on startup.
21-25: Review the impact of commented-out Fusion server configurations.
The removal of IUserAuthorization and IUserInteraction servers, along with WebSocket support, suggests a significant architectural change. Please verify:
- Are these services being replaced with EF-based alternatives?
- Are there any clients depending on these WebSocket endpoints?
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for potential breaking changes
# Test 1: Look for client-side references to removed services
rg "IUserAuthorization|IUserInteraction"
# Test 2: Check for WebSocket client implementations
rg "WebSocket" -g "*.ts" -g "*.js" -g "*.cs"Consider:
- Documenting the migration path for existing clients
- Adding deprecation notices if this is a breaking change
- Ensuring new EF-based auth system provides equivalent functionality
docker-compose.yaml (1)
27-28: Good use of secure authentication method
Excellent choice using scram-sha-256 for PostgreSQL authentication instead of the default trust or md5.
src/AppHost/Program.cs (2)
34-37: Review JWT configuration and hard-coded values.
- The JWT expiration time is hard-coded to "228". Consider making this configurable through parameters like other sensitive values.
- JWT configuration should ideally use secure configuration patterns rather than environment variables.
Let's verify the project reference change impact:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any remaining references to the old project name
rg -l 'argon-api'
# Verify project structure
fd -e csproj -e sln20-30: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider security and stability improvements for Clickhouse configuration.
- The Docker image should be pinned to a specific version for stability:
- .WithImage("clickhouse/clickhouse-server")
+ .WithImage("clickhouse/clickhouse-server:23.8")- Consider using secrets management for sensitive environment variables instead of direct parameter values.
Let's verify the volume persistence configuration:
✅ Verification successful
Docker image version pinning and volume configuration review
The Clickhouse container configuration appears to be the only one using volume mounts in the codebase, and the implementation follows standard practices:
- Data persistence is properly configured with a named volume for Clickhouse data
- Logs are correctly separated into their own volume
- Volume naming is clear and purpose-specific
Recommendations remain:
- Pin the Docker image version for stability:
- .WithImage("clickhouse/clickhouse-server")
+ .WithImage("clickhouse/clickhouse-server:23.8")- Consider moving sensitive credentials to a secure configuration management solution.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if volumes are properly configured in other container resources
rg -A 2 'WithVolume\('
Length of output: 200
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for volume configurations in the codebase
rg -A 2 'WithVolume\(' --type cs
Length of output: 342
src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs (1)
35-35: Consider version handling strategy for MemoryPack serialization.
Using VersionTolerant generation might impact performance. Consider if strict versioning would be more appropriate for your use case.
Let's check if there are other VersionTolerant types in the codebase:
src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs (1)
24-24: ```shell
#!/bin/bash
Let's try a broader search for access control patterns
echo "Searching for channel access control patterns..."
rg -t cs -A 5 "ServerRole" src/Argon.Api
echo "Searching for authorization attributes and checks..."
rg -t cs -A 5 "Authorize|RequireRole|AccessLevel" src/Argon.Api
echo "Looking for channel-related controller actions..."
ast-grep --pattern 'public class $_ : ControllerBase {
$$$
[Http$]
public $ $Channel$($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
</details>
<details>
<summary>Argon.Server.sln (1)</summary>
`21-21`: **LGTM! Good practice including Docker Compose configuration.**
Including the Docker Compose configuration in Solution Items makes the infrastructure setup easily accessible to all developers.
</details>
<details>
<summary>src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs (2)</summary>
`57-124`: **Consider simplifying serialization strategy.**
The DTO uses multiple serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, MessagePack) which might increase complexity and maintenance overhead. Consider:
1. Documenting why multiple serialization frameworks are needed
2. Adding validation attributes to match the entity's constraints
3. Using a source generator or T4 template to maintain property ordering
Let's check if other DTOs follow the same pattern:
```shell
#!/bin/bash
# Search for other DTOs with multiple serialization attributes
rg -l "\[DataContract\].*\[MemoryPackable\].*\[MessagePackObject\]" --type csharp
7-12: Consider enhancing role management implementation.
The current role system might be too simplistic for a server management system. Consider:
- Adding fine-grained permissions (e.g., MANAGE_MESSAGES, MANAGE_USERS, etc.)
- Using the [Flags] attribute if roles should be combinable
- Adding XML documentation for the enum and its values
Let's check if there are any permission checks in the codebase:
src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs (1)
97-97: Verify the impact on existing consumers.
The type change from List<Guid> to List<ServerDetailsResponse> is a breaking change. Ensure all consumers are updated accordingly.
✅ Verification successful
Type change appears to be part of a coordinated update
Based on the implementation in UserInteractionService, the type change from List<Guid> to List<ServerDetailsResponse> is already properly handled. The service is using a conversion from the internal model to ServerDetailsResponse through an explicit cast operator ((ServerDetailsResponse)x), suggesting this is part of a coordinated update rather than a breaking change that needs additional fixes.
- The change is contained within the API project and its contracts
- No direct serialization/deserialization of the type was found
- The implementation already handles the new type correctly
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for direct usage of ServerResponse.Channels to identify affected code
rg -l "ServerResponse.*Channels" --type cs
# Search for potential deserialization of ServerResponse
rg -l "Deserialize.*ServerResponse" --type cs
Length of output: 92
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for any usage of IUserInteraction interface
rg -l "IUserInteraction" --type cs
# Search for any references to ServerDetailsResponse
rg -l "ServerDetailsResponse" --type cs
# Search for any class that implements IUserInteraction
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ : $$$IUserInteraction$$$'
Length of output: 334
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the implementation in UserInteractionService to see how Channels is used
rg "Channels" src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs -B 2 -A 2
# Check if there are any serialization/deserialization operations
rg "JsonSerializer|JsonConvert" src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs
# Look for any API endpoints or controllers that might be using this
rg "ServerDetailsResponse" src/Argon.Api/Controllers -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 482
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241104210028_Init.Designer.cs (1)
203-237: Review cascade delete behavior and missing relationships.
Consider the following relationship improvements:
- The cascade delete on Server-Channel relationship might be too aggressive. Consider using
DeleteBehavior.Restrictto prevent accidental data loss. - Add a relationship between Channel and User since
Channel.UserIdexists but has no foreign key constraint.
Let's verify if there are any Channel-User relationships defined elsewhere:
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserAuthorization.cs (1)
12-14: Verify necessity of PasswordConfirmation in authorization request
In UserCredentialsInput, PasswordConfirmation is set to request.password. Typically, password confirmation is used during registration, not during authorization. Please verify if PasswordConfirmation is required here. If not, consider removing it to simplify the request.
Run the following script to check where UserCredentialsInput is used and whether PasswordConfirmation is necessary:
src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs (4)
28-34: Verify the usage of the InjectId attribute and the id parameter in the codebase.
The Get method now uses the InjectId attribute to inject the user ID into the action method. Ensure that the InjectId attribute is properly defined and used consistently across the codebase. Also, verify that the id parameter is correctly used and handled in the ISessionManager implementation.
Run the following script to verify the usage of the InjectId attribute and the id parameter:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage of the `InjectId` attribute and the `id` parameter in the codebase.
# Test: Search for the `InjectId` attribute usage. Expect: Consistent usage across the codebase.
rg -g '*.cs' $'InjectId'
# Test: Search for the `id` parameter usage in the `ISessionManager` implementation. Expect: Proper handling of the `id` parameter.
ast-grep --pattern $'class SessionManager : ISessionManager {
$$$
GetUser(string id) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'21-25: Verify the usage of ISessionManager and JwtToken in the codebase.
The new Authorize method uses ISessionManager to authorize users and returns a JwtToken. Ensure that the ISessionManager interface and its implementation are correctly defined and used throughout the codebase. Also, verify that the JwtToken type is properly defined and used consistently.
Run the following script to verify the usage of ISessionManager and JwtToken:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage of `ISessionManager` and `JwtToken` in the codebase.
# Test: Search for the `ISessionManager` interface and its implementation. Expect: Proper definition and usage.
rg -g '*.cs' $'interface ISessionManager'
rg -g '*.cs' $'class SessionManager'
# Test: Search for the `JwtToken` type usage. Expect: Consistent usage across the codebase.
rg -g '*.cs' $'JwtToken'15-18: Verify the usage of UserCredentialsInput and IUserManager in the codebase.
The Post method now accepts a UserCredentialsInput parameter and uses IUserManager to create a user. Ensure that the UserCredentialsInput type is properly defined and used consistently across the codebase. Also, verify that the IUserManager interface and its implementation are correctly defined and used.
Run the following script to verify the usage of UserCredentialsInput and IUserManager:
✅ Verification successful
The previous search didn't provide complete information. Let's try with more context lines and specific pattern matching to understand the user management implementation and the data model being used.
The implementation of UserCredentialsInput and IUserManager is properly defined and used consistently
The verification shows that:
UserCredentialsInputis properly defined as a serializable record inIUserManager.csand used consistently across the codebase for user creation, updates, and authorizationIUserManagerinterface is correctly defined inGrains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cswith proper implementation inGrains/UserManager.cs- The usage in
UsersController.csfollows the established pattern where:- User creation is handled by
IUserManager.CreateUser - Authorization is handled by
ISessionManager.Authorize - Both services properly consume the
UserCredentialsInputmodel
- User creation is handled by
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage of `UserCredentialsInput` and `IUserManager` in the codebase.
# Test: Search for the `UserCredentialsInput` type usage. Expect: Consistent usage across the codebase.
rg -g '*.cs' $'UserCredentialsInput'
# Test: Search for the `IUserManager` interface and its implementation. Expect: Proper definition and usage.
rg -g '*.cs' $'interface IUserManager'
rg -g '*.cs' $'class UserManager'
Length of output: 1460
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for UserCredentialsInput definition and usage
rg -g '*.cs' -B 2 -A 2 'UserCredentialsInput'
# Search for IUserManager interface and implementations
rg -g '*.cs' -B 2 -A 2 'IUserManager'
# Search for actual user creation/management logic
ast-grep --pattern 'CreateUser($$$)'
Length of output: 6710
3-5: Verify the usage of the new namespaces and types in the codebase.
The code introduces new namespaces and types, such as Attributes, Entities, Grains.Interfaces, and Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations. Ensure that these namespaces and types are properly defined and used consistently throughout the codebase.
Run the following script to verify the usage of the new namespaces and types:
Also applies to: 9-9
✅ Verification successful
The namespaces and types are properly defined and used consistently throughout the codebase
The verification shows that:
- The
Attributesnamespace is properly defined insrc/Argon.Api/Attributes/withInjectIdAttributebeing used consistently across multiple controllers - The
Entitiesnamespace is well-structured insrc/Argon.Api/Entities/containing properly defined models - Swashbuckle annotations are correctly imported and used across controllers
- All imports are properly referenced and used in their respective files
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage of the new namespaces and types in the codebase.
# Test: Search for the namespace declarations. Expect: Matching namespace declarations in the corresponding files.
rg -g '*.cs' $'namespace Argon.Api.Attributes'
rg -g '*.cs' $'namespace Argon.Api.Entities'
rg -g '*.cs' $'namespace Argon.Grains.Interfaces'
# Test: Search for the type usage. Expect: Consistent usage of the types across the codebase.
rg -g '*.cs' $'InjectId'
rg -g '*.cs' $'SwaggerIgnore'
Length of output: 1460
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's verify the namespaces and types more thoroughly
# Check for namespace declarations
rg -g '*.cs' '^namespace.*Attributes'
rg -g '*.cs' '^namespace.*Entities'
# Check for actual attribute definitions and usage
rg -g '*.cs' 'class.*Attribute.*:.*Attribute'
rg -g '*.cs' '\[.*Inject.*\]'
# Check for entity definitions
rg -g '*.cs' 'class User'
rg -g '*.cs' 'record.*User'
# Check for Swashbuckle usage
rg -g '*.cs' 'using Swashbuckle'
rg -g '*.cs' '\[Swagger'
# Check all imports to understand namespace structure
rg -g '*.cs' '^using' src/Argon.Api/
Length of output: 14816
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (5)
21-21: Validate the completeness of ChannelInput in UpdateChannel
The UpdateChannel method now accepts a ChannelInput. Ensure that ChannelInput includes all necessary fields required for updating a channel. Also, confirm that input validation is in place to handle improper or incomplete data.
24-51: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Review serialization attributes for potential conflicts
The ChannelInput record is decorated with multiple serialization attributes from different frameworks:
[DataContract]and[DataMember][MemoryPackable]and[MemoryPackOrder][MessagePackObject]and[Key][GenerateSerializer]and[Id][Serializable]
Using multiple serialization frameworks simultaneously can lead to conflicts or increased complexity. Consider consolidating to a single serialization framework if possible. If multiple frameworks are necessary, ensure that they are correctly configured to avoid serialization issues.
Run the following script to check for other types using multiple serialization attributes:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Identify types with multiple serialization attributes.
# Test: Find classes or records with more than one serialization attribute.
rg '@(DataContract|MemoryPackable|MessagePackObject|GenerateSerializer|Serializable)' --glob '**/*.cs' -A 5 | grep -E '@(DataContract|MemoryPackable|MessagePackObject|GenerateSerializer|Serializable)' -B 5Consider documenting the rationale for using multiple serializers to aid future maintainers.
17-18:
Update dependent code to handle ChannelDto return type
The GetChannel method now returns a ChannelDto instead of a ChannelStorage. Ensure that all code consuming this method is updated to handle ChannelDto. This includes client code and any serialization/deserialization processes.
Run the following script to identify usages of GetChannel:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all usages of the `GetChannel` method.
# Test: Search for references to `GetChannel()`. Expect: All usages are updated to handle `ChannelDto`.
rg '\.GetChannel\(\)' --glob '**/*.cs' -A 214-15: Ensure consistent use of [Alias] attributes
The Leave method also uses the [Alias("Leave")] attribute. Confirm that this alias is unique and that all methods in grain interfaces use aliases consistently to avoid invocation issues.
Run the following script to check for consistency:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that method aliases are consistently applied and unique.
# Test: List all Alias attributes in grain interfaces.
rg '@Alias\("[^"]+"\)' --glob '**/*.cs'11-12: Confirm uniqueness of the [Alias("Join")] attribute
The method Join is decorated with [Alias("Join")]. Ensure that the alias "Join" is unique within the grain interface methods to prevent any potential conflicts or ambiguities in method invocation.
Run the following script to check for duplicate aliases:
✅ Verification successful
The [Alias("Join")] attribute is unique and correctly used
The verification shows that the alias "Join" is used only once across all grain interfaces, specifically in IChannelManager.cs. Each method in the grain interfaces has its own unique alias, following a consistent naming pattern. The implementation is correct and there are no conflicts or ambiguities.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that the alias "Join" is unique across grain interfaces.
# Test: Search for methods with Alias("Join") in grain interfaces. Expect: Only one occurrence.
rg -A 2 '@Alias\("Join"\)' --glob '**/*.cs'
Length of output: 356
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to search for Alias attributes
rg '\[Alias\("Join"\)\]' --type cs
Length of output: 107
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's also search for all Alias attributes to see the complete picture
rg '\[Alias\("([^"]+)"\)\]' --type cs
Length of output: 1396
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's also check the specific file content to understand the context better
cat src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs
Length of output: 1281
src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs (1)
14-17:
Invalid class constructor syntax
The class ChannelsController is declared with parameters directly after the class name (lines 14-17), which is not valid C# syntax and will result in a compilation error. Constructors should be defined inside the class body.
Apply this diff to correct the class declaration:
-public class ChannelsController(
- IGrainFactory grainFactory
-) : ControllerBase
+public class ChannelsController : ControllerBase
+{
+ private readonly IGrainFactory grainFactory;
+
+ public ChannelsController(IGrainFactory grainFactory)
+ {
+ this.grainFactory = grainFactory;
+ }Likely invalid or redundant comment.
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs (1)
8-8: Ensure consistent key types across the codebase
Changing the key type from IGrainWithStringKey to IGrainWithGuidKey may affect other grains and clients that interact with IUserManager. Please verify that all references and usages have been updated to use the new GUID key to prevent any runtime issues.
To assist with verification, you can run the following script:
✅ Verification successful
The key type change is correctly implemented across the codebase
The verification shows that all references to IUserManager are consistently using GUIDs:
ServerManager.csusescreatorId(Guid)SessionManager.csusesGetPrimaryKey()which returns a GuidUsersController.csusesGuid.NewGuid()UserManager.csimplementation confirms Guid usage withGetPrimaryKey()for database queries
The commented-out code in UserInteractionService.cs is not active, so it doesn't affect the current implementation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all references to IUserManager and check for key type usage
# Search for IUserManager usage in the codebase
rg 'IUserManager'
# Check for grain references using string keys
rg -A 2 'IUserManager' | rg 'GetGrain<.*string.*>'
Length of output: 747
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's analyze the usage patterns more thoroughly
# Check for any string to GUID conversions or string-based grain calls
rg -B 2 -A 2 'GetGrain<IUserManager>'
# Look for the implementation to understand the key usage
cat src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs
# Check for any potential user ID related patterns
rg -l 'userId|username' src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs
Length of output: 3909
src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs (1)
29-30:
Reconsider authentication logic: Require both password and OTP for multi-factor authentication
Currently, VerifyPassword returns true if either the password or the OTP is valid (|| operator). For multi-factor authentication, it's recommended to require both the password and OTP to be valid (&& operator). Allowing access with only one factor reduces security.
Apply this diff to require both password and OTP to be valid:
public bool VerifyPassword(string? inputPassword, User user) =>
- ValidatePassword(inputPassword, user.PasswordDigest) || VerifyOtp(inputPassword, user.OTP);
+ ValidatePassword(inputPassword, user.PasswordDigest) && VerifyOtp(user.InputOtp, user.OTP);Also, consider separating password and OTP inputs to avoid confusion and enhance security.
Likely invalid or redundant comment.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs (1)
51-54: Handle potential exceptions in GenerateJwt
The GenerateJwt method calls managerService.GenerateJwt, which might throw exceptions if JWT generation fails. Ensure that exceptions are properly handled or logged to prevent unexpected crashes and to aid in debugging.
Review the GenerateJwt implementation and consider adding try-catch blocks or using error handling mechanisms to handle potential exceptions gracefully.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs (1)
14-27: Ensure sensitive information is not exposed in UserDto.
When returning the user object, it's important to verify that sensitive fields like PasswordDigest and OTP are not included in the UserDto sent to clients.
Run the following script to check for exposure of sensitive data:
This script searches for any occurrences of PasswordDigest or OTP in the UserDto class to ensure they're not being exposed.
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information to verify the DTO mapping.
Let me get the complete UserDto definition to verify the fields being exposed.
Let me get the complete implicit conversion from User to UserDto to verify all mapped fields.
No sensitive data exposure found in UserDto
Based on the verification of the UserDto record definition and the implicit conversion operator, sensitive fields like PasswordDigest and OTP are not included in the DTO. The UserDto only exposes safe fields:
- Id, CreatedAt, UpdatedAt
- Email, Username
- PhoneNumber, AvatarUrl
- DeletedAt
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify that UserDto does not contain sensitive fields.
# Find the UserDto definition and display its properties.
fd --type f --name "UserDto.cs" --exec cat {} \; | rg -A 10 'class UserDto'
# Alternatively, search for properties in UserDto that match sensitive fields.
rg 'public.*(PasswordDigest|OTP)' -t cs
Length of output: 582
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for UserDto definition
ast-grep --pattern 'class UserDto {
$$$
}'
# Search for any mapping between User and UserDto
rg -A 5 "UserDto" --type cs
Length of output: 5081
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get the complete UserDto record definition with all its properties
rg -A 20 "record UserDto\(" --type cs
Length of output: 1304
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get the complete implicit operator implementation
rg -A 10 "implicit operator UserDto" --type cs
Length of output: 692
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (1)
63-65: Handle potential null reference exceptions
The Get method uses FirstAsync, which will throw an exception if no matching channel is found.
Ensure that a channel with the given ID exists or handle the possibility that it may not. Consider using FirstOrDefaultAsync and adding a null check.
Apply this change:
- return await context.Channels.FirstAsync(c => c.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+ var channel = await context.Channels.FirstOrDefaultAsync(c => c.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+ if (channel == null)
+ throw new KeyNotFoundException($"Channel with ID {this.GetPrimaryKey()} not found.");
+ return channel;src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs (3)
3-3: Addition of 'using System.Text;' is appropriate
The inclusion of using System.Text; is necessary for the Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes(jwt.Key) call in line 45~. This allows for proper encoding of the JWT signing key.
41-51: Validation parameters configured correctly
The TokenValidationParameters are now explicitly set, including ValidateLifetime = true and ClockSkew = TimeSpan.Zero, which enhances security by enforcing strict validation of token lifetimes without clock skew.
17-22:
Update all deconstruction usages of 'JwtOptions' to include 'expires'
The Deconstruct method now includes the expires parameter. To prevent runtime errors, ensure all instances where JwtOptions is deconstructed are updated to include the new parameter.
Run the following script to identify all deconstructions of JwtOptions:
This script searches for deconstruction patterns and highlights those missing the expires parameter.
✅ Verification successful
No update needed - deconstruction usage is already correct
The only usage of JwtOptions deconstruction is in UserManagerService.cs line 16:
var (issuer, audience, key, exp) = jwt.Value;This deconstruction already includes all four parameters (with 'exp' being the variable name for 'expires'), so no updates are required.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all deconstruction assignments of 'JwtOptions' and check for the 'expires' parameter.
# Test: Search for deconstruction patterns of 'JwtOptions'.
# Expected: Deconstructions should include four variables (issuer, audience, key, expires).
rg 'var\s*\(\s*\w+\s*,\s*\w+\s*,\s*\w+\s*(,\s*\w+\s*)?\)\s*=\s*.*Get<JwtOptions>\s*\(\s*\)' -A 2
Length of output: 98
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search pattern to find any usage of JwtOptions deconstruction
# First, find all files that mention JwtOptions
rg -l "JwtOptions"
# Then search for var declarations with multiple variables
rg "var\s*\([^)]+\)\s*=.*JwtOptions" -A 2
# Also search for direct deconstruction syntax
rg "[\s(]var\s*\([^)]+\)\s*=\s*\w+\s*;" -A 2
# Additionally, let's check for any direct usage of the Deconstruct method
rg "Deconstruct.*JwtOptions" -A 2
Length of output: 231
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the content of the files that mention JwtOptions
# First, the service file
cat "src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs"
# Then the options file itself (though we already know its content)
cat "src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs"
Length of output: 5060
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (1)
78-80: Verify that AccessLevel assignment aligns with intended permissions.
Setting AccessLevel to ServerRole.User may have implications on channel permissions. Ensure that this assignment reflects the desired access level for default channels.
Run the following script to check all usages of ServerRole.User and their impact:
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the ServerRole enum and its usage hierarchy.
Let me search for the enum definition and any access control checks.
Setting AccessLevel to ServerRole.User is the correct default for channels
The implementation is correct and aligns with the intended permissions model because:
ServerRoleenum has three levels:User,Admin, andOwner- Setting
AccessLevel = ServerRole.Userfor channels means they are accessible to all server members by default - This is consistent with the codebase where:
- Server creators get
ServerRole.Owner - New server members get
ServerRole.Userby default - Channels can be modified later through
ChannelManager.Update()if different access levels are needed
- Server creators get
The current implementation follows a sensible permission hierarchy where channels are accessible to everyone by default, which is the expected behavior for most chat applications.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the usage and implications of 'ServerRole.User' in the codebase.
# Test: Search for all references to 'ServerRole.User' and display the surrounding context.
rg 'ServerRole\.User' -A 5
Length of output: 1365
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for ServerRole enum definition and its values
ast-grep --pattern 'enum ServerRole {
$$$
}'
# Search for any permission checks or validations using ServerRole
rg -B 3 -A 3 'ServerRole\.' --type cs
Length of output: 2412
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find ServerRole enum definition
rg -B 1 -A 10 "enum ServerRole"
# Find any access control or permission validation logic
rg -B 3 -A 5 "AccessLevel|Role.*ServerRole" --type cs
Length of output: 9575
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/ApplicationDbContextModelSnapshot.cs (1)
200-206: Verify cascade delete behaviors in relationships
The relationships for Channel and Server (lines 200-206) and UsersToServerRelation with Server and User (lines 209-222) use OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade). This means deleting a Server or User will cascade delete related entities. Please verify that this behavior aligns with business requirements, as it may lead to unintended data loss.
Run the following script to identify all cascade delete configurations:
Also applies to: 209-222
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the entity relationships to better understand the data model.
Let me check the entity definitions and their relationships.
Let me try one last search to find the entity definitions in a different way.
Cascade delete behavior is appropriate for the current data model
The cascade delete configuration aligns with the business requirements based on the entity relationships and deletion patterns found in the codebase:
ServertoChannel: Channels are integral parts of a server and should be deleted when their parent server is removed (confirmed byDeleteServerendpoint inServersController)ServertoUsersToServerRelation: These are join table entries that track user membership in servers, which should be cleaned up when a server is deletedUsertoUsersToServerRelation: User's membership records should be removed when a user is deleted
The cascade delete ensures referential integrity and prevents orphaned records, which is the expected behavior for this type of application where these entities have strong parent-child relationships.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all instances of cascade delete behaviors in entity relationships.
# Expected: Review these instances to ensure they match the intended data handling policies.
rg --type cs 'OnDelete\(DeleteBehavior\.Cascade\)' -A 3
Length of output: 2292
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find entity configurations in DbContext
ast-grep --pattern 'modelBuilder.Entity("$_", b => {
$$$
})'
# Find entity class definitions to understand the relationships
fd -e cs -x rg -l "class (Server|Channel|User|UsersToServerRelation)" {}
Length of output: 550
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Find entity class definitions and their relationships
rg -A 10 "class (Server|Channel|User|UsersToServerRelation)" --type cs ./src/Argon.Api/Entities/
# Look for any documentation about data deletion policies
fd README.md -x cat {}
Length of output: 125
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for entity files and their content
fd -e cs -x cat {} \; -x echo "---" \; | rg -A 20 "^namespace.*Entities|class (Server|Channel|User|UsersToServerRelation)"
# Look for any deletion-related controller actions or service methods
rg -A 5 "Delete|Remove" --type cs ./src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ ./src/Argon.Api/Services/
Length of output: 11401
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs (2)
17-18: Confirm Validation in UpdateServer Method
The UpdateServer method accepts a ServerInput without validation logic in the interface definition. Ensure that the implementation includes necessary validation to prevent invalid data from causing issues in the server state.
Check that the implementing class performs adequate validation on the ServerInput parameters.
5-6: Verify Compatibility Between MemoryPack and MessagePack
Both MemoryPack and MessagePack serialization frameworks are being used (using MemoryPack; and using MessagePack;), and attributes from both are applied to the ServerInput record and its properties. This dual usage may lead to serialization conflicts or unexpected behavior.
Run the following script to identify other instances where both frameworks are used together:
Review the findings to ensure that using both frameworks is intentional and conflict-free.
Also applies to: 24-25, 31-32, 36-37, 41-42
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information to understand the usage pattern better.
Let me check one more thing to understand if this is a consistent pattern across the codebase.
Let me fix the command to properly check the pattern.
Using Multiple Serialization Frameworks is Intentional and Consistent
The usage of both MemoryPack and MessagePack is a deliberate and consistent pattern across the codebase. All DTOs and input models follow the same attribute structure:
[DataContract][MemoryPackable(GenerateType.VersionTolerant)][MessagePackObject][Serializable][GenerateSerializer]
This pattern is systematically applied across multiple components including Server, Channel, User, and other domain models, indicating it's part of the project's serialization strategy rather than an oversight.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find classes or records using both MemoryPack and MessagePack attributes.
# Expected: List of files where both attributes are present.
rg -A 5 '\[MemoryPackable' | rg '\[MessagePackObject\]'
Length of output: 1120
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the actual implementation of classes with MessagePackObject to see if they also have MemoryPackable
rg -B 2 -A 2 '\[MessagePackObject\]' src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs
Length of output: 206
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for MemoryPack attribute usage patterns
rg '\[MemoryPackable' src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs
Length of output: 120
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for any documentation or comments about serialization strategy
rg -i "serializ|memorypack|messagepack" src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs
Length of output: 372
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if this combination of attributes is a consistent pattern in other files
rg -C 5 '^\[DataContract\].*\n.*\[MemoryPackable.*\n.*\[MessagePackObject\].*\n.*\[Serializable\].*\n.*\[GenerateSerializer\]'
Length of output: 320
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if this combination of attributes is a consistent pattern in other files
rg -U -C 5 '(?m)^\[DataContract\].*[\r\n]+.*\[MemoryPackable.*[\r\n]+.*\[MessagePackObject\].*[\r\n]+.*\[Serializable\].*[\r\n]+.*\[GenerateSerializer\]'
Length of output: 8450
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Alternative approach: Check files that have both attributes to see their structure
for file in $(rg -l '\[MemoryPackable'); do
echo "=== $file ==="
rg '^\[.*\]' "$file"
done
Length of output: 5054
| public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; } | ||
| public DbSet<Server> Servers { get; set; } | ||
| public DbSet<Channel> Channels { get; set; } | ||
| public DbSet<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fix the UsersToServerRelations property definition.
The DbSet property is defined with a getter only, which will prevent Entity Framework Core from properly managing the set. Add a setter to allow EF Core to initialize and manage the collection.
- public DbSet<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; }
+ public required DbSet<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; set; }📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public DbSet<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; } | |
| public required DbSet<UsersToServerRelation> UsersToServerRelations { get; set; } |
| public static string Hex(int n) | ||
| { | ||
| var buffer = new byte[n]; | ||
| using (var rng = RandomNumberGenerator.Create()) | ||
| { | ||
| rng.GetBytes(buffer); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return BitConverter.ToString(buffer).Replace("-", "").ToLower(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add input validation and XML documentation.
The method needs input validation and documentation for proper usage.
Apply these changes:
+/// <summary>
+/// Generates a cryptographically secure random hexadecimal string.
+/// </summary>
+/// <param name="n">Number of random bytes to generate (1-1024).</param>
+/// <returns>A lowercase hexadecimal string representation of the random bytes.</returns>
+/// <exception cref="ArgumentOutOfRangeException">Thrown when n is less than 1 or greater than 1024.</exception>
public static string Hex(int n)
{
+ const int MaxBytes = 1024;
+ if (n < 1 || n > MaxBytes)
+ {
+ throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(
+ nameof(n),
+ n,
+ $"Number of bytes must be between 1 and {MaxBytes}."
+ );
+ }
+
var buffer = new byte[n];
- using (var rng = RandomNumberGenerator.Create())
- {
- rng.GetBytes(buffer);
- }
+ using var rng = RandomNumberGenerator.Create();
+ rng.GetBytes(buffer);
return BitConverter.ToString(buffer).Replace("-", "").ToLower();
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public static string Hex(int n) | |
| { | |
| var buffer = new byte[n]; | |
| using (var rng = RandomNumberGenerator.Create()) | |
| { | |
| rng.GetBytes(buffer); | |
| } | |
| return BitConverter.ToString(buffer).Replace("-", "").ToLower(); | |
| } | |
| /// <summary> | |
| /// Generates a cryptographically secure random hexadecimal string. | |
| /// </summary> | |
| /// <param name="n">Number of random bytes to generate (1-1024).</param> | |
| /// <returns>A lowercase hexadecimal string representation of the random bytes.</returns> | |
| /// <exception cref="ArgumentOutOfRangeException">Thrown when n is less than 1 or greater than 1024.</exception> | |
| public static string Hex(int n) | |
| { | |
| const int MaxBytes = 1024; | |
| if (n < 1 || n > MaxBytes) | |
| { | |
| throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException( | |
| nameof(n), | |
| n, | |
| $"Number of bytes must be between 1 and {MaxBytes}." | |
| ); | |
| } | |
| var buffer = new byte[n]; | |
| using var rng = RandomNumberGenerator.Create(); | |
| rng.GetBytes(buffer); | |
| return BitConverter.ToString(buffer).Replace("-", "").ToLower(); | |
| } |
💡 Codebase verification
Security concerns identified in OTP implementation
The current implementation of SecureRandom.Hex(3) for OTP generation has several security issues:
- Only generates 3 hex characters, resulting in just 4096 (16^3) possible combinations, making it vulnerable to brute force attacks
- OTPs are logged in plain text (LogCritical)
- OTPs don't expire and are regenerated on every login attempt
- No rate limiting is implemented for OTP verification attempts
Recommendations:
- Increase OTP length to at least 6 characters (SecureRandom.Hex(6))
- Implement OTP expiration
- Add rate limiting for verification attempts
- Remove plain text logging of OTPs
- Consider using a standard TOTP implementation instead
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the usage of this security-critical code.
Let's verify how this method is being used in the codebase to ensure it's appropriately applied for security purposes.
Let's gather more specific information about how SecureRandom.Hex is being used in the password hashing service.
Let's check how the OTP is used in the system to ensure the security implications of using a 3-character hex string.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all usages of SecureRandom.Hex to verify its application
echo "Searching for direct usage of SecureRandom.Hex..."
rg -l "SecureRandom\.Hex"
echo -e "\nSearching for potential security-related contexts..."
rg -l -g "!*.{md,txt}" -e "password" -e "token" -e "secret" -e "key" -e "auth" -e "session"
Length of output: 1071
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Get the implementation details of where SecureRandom.Hex is used
echo "Content of IPasswordHashingService.cs:"
cat src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs
echo -e "\nSearching for the implementation of IPasswordHashingService:"
rg -l "IPasswordHashingService"
echo -e "\nSearching for the implementation class content:"
rg -A 10 -B 10 "SecureRandom\.Hex" src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs
Length of output: 2642
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check OTP usage in the codebase
echo "Searching for OTP references in the codebase:"
rg -A 5 -B 5 "\.OTP"
echo -e "\nChecking UserManager implementation for OTP handling:"
cat src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs
echo -e "\nChecking SessionManager implementation for OTP usage:"
cat src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs
Length of output: 6959
| [DataMember(Order = 0)] | ||
| [MemoryPackOrder(0)] | ||
| [Id(0)] | ||
| public List<UsersToServerRelationDto> Users { get; set; } = new(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider thread-safety and validation for the Users collection.
The mutable List<T> property could lead to thread-safety issues in a concurrent environment. Additionally, there are no size limits or validation rules.
Consider these improvements:
- public List<UsersToServerRelationDto> Users { get; set; } = new();
+ public IReadOnlyCollection<UsersToServerRelationDto> Users => _users.AsReadOnly();
+ private readonly List<UsersToServerRelationDto> _users = new();
+
+ public void AddUser(UsersToServerRelationDto user)
+ {
+ ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(user);
+ // Add any size limits or validation rules here
+ _users.Add(user);
+ }📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [DataMember(Order = 0)] | |
| [MemoryPackOrder(0)] | |
| [Id(0)] | |
| public List<UsersToServerRelationDto> Users { get; set; } = new(); | |
| [DataMember(Order = 0)] | |
| [MemoryPackOrder(0)] | |
| [Id(0)] | |
| public IReadOnlyCollection<UsersToServerRelationDto> Users => _users.AsReadOnly(); | |
| private readonly List<UsersToServerRelationDto> _users = new(); | |
| public void AddUser(UsersToServerRelationDto user) | |
| { | |
| ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(user); | |
| // Add any size limits or validation rules here | |
| _users.Add(user); | |
| } |
| public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context) | ||
| { | ||
| var id = context.HttpContext.User.Claims.FirstOrDefault(cl => cl.Type == "id")?.Value; | ||
| if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id)) | ||
| context.ActionArguments["id"] = id; | ||
| base.OnActionExecuting(context); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add proper validation and error handling.
The current implementation has several potential issues that need to be addressed:
- Missing null checks could lead to NullReferenceException
- No validation if the action method actually has an "id" parameter
- Hard-coded claim type should be a constant
- No type conversion or validation of the ID value
Here's a suggested improvement:
+private const string IdClaimType = "id";
+private const string IdParameterName = "id";
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context)
{
- var id = context.HttpContext.User.Claims.FirstOrDefault(cl => cl.Type == "id")?.Value;
- if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id))
- context.ActionArguments["id"] = id;
+ if (context?.HttpContext?.User == null)
+ return;
+
+ // Verify if the action has an "id" parameter
+ if (!context.ActionDescriptor.Parameters.Any(p => p.Name == IdParameterName))
+ return;
+
+ var id = context.HttpContext.User.Claims
+ .FirstOrDefault(cl => cl.Type == IdClaimType)?.Value;
+
+ if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id))
+ {
+ try
+ {
+ context.ActionArguments[IdParameterName] = id;
+ }
+ catch (Exception ex)
+ {
+ // Log the error if logging is available
+ // Consider throwing a more specific exception
+ throw new InvalidOperationException(
+ $"Failed to inject ID into action arguments: {ex.Message}", ex);
+ }
+ }
+
base.OnActionExecuting(context);
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context) | |
| { | |
| var id = context.HttpContext.User.Claims.FirstOrDefault(cl => cl.Type == "id")?.Value; | |
| if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id)) | |
| context.ActionArguments["id"] = id; | |
| base.OnActionExecuting(context); | |
| } | |
| private const string IdClaimType = "id"; | |
| private const string IdParameterName = "id"; | |
| public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context) | |
| { | |
| if (context?.HttpContext?.User == null) | |
| return; | |
| // Verify if the action has an "id" parameter | |
| if (!context.ActionDescriptor.Parameters.Any(p => p.Name == IdParameterName)) | |
| return; | |
| var id = context.HttpContext.User.Claims | |
| .FirstOrDefault(cl => cl.Type == IdClaimType)?.Value; | |
| if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(id)) | |
| { | |
| try | |
| { | |
| context.ActionArguments[IdParameterName] = id; | |
| } | |
| catch (Exception ex) | |
| { | |
| // Log the error if logging is available | |
| // Consider throwing a more specific exception | |
| throw new InvalidOperationException( | |
| $"Failed to inject ID into action arguments: {ex.Message}", ex); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| base.OnActionExecuting(context); | |
| } |
| [Alias("Logout")] | ||
| Task Logout(); // TODO: revoke jwt by adding it into a blacklist |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implement JWT revocation mechanism.
The TODO comment indicates missing JWT revocation functionality. This is a critical security feature that should be implemented before deployment.
Would you like me to help design a secure JWT revocation mechanism using a distributed cache or database? This would include:
- Token blacklist storage strategy
- Cleanup mechanism for expired tokens
- Integration with the authentication flow
| [property: MemoryPackOrder(0)] | ||
| [property: Key(0)] | ||
| [property: Id(0)] | ||
| string Name, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 1)] | ||
| [property: MemoryPackOrder(1)] | ||
| [property: Key(1)] | ||
| [property: Id(1)] | ||
| string? Description, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 2)] | ||
| [property: MemoryPackOrder(2)] | ||
| [property: Key(2)] | ||
| [property: Id(2)] | ||
| string? AvatarUrl | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Redundant Serialization Attributes on Properties
Each property within the ServerInput record is annotated with multiple serialization-related attributes: [DataMember(Order = n)], [MemoryPackOrder(n)], [Key(n)], [Id(n)]. This redundancy may cause serialization conflicts and increase maintenance complexity.
Align the property annotations with the chosen serialization framework. For example, if using [DataContract], you may keep [DataMember] and remove the others:
- [property: DataMember(Order = 0)]
- [property: MemoryPackOrder(0)]
- [property: Key(0)]
- [property: Id(0)]
string Name,Refactored:
[property: DataMember(Order = 0)]
string Name,| Task DeleteServer(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Clarify the Functionality of DeleteServer Method
The DeleteServer method is declared without parameters. It's essential to ensure that the method correctly identifies which server to delete, possibly based on the grain's key or context.
If the server ID is derived from the grain's key, ensure this is clearly documented. Otherwise, consider specifying the server ID as a parameter:
-Task DeleteServer();
+Task DeleteServer(Guid serverId);Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| [MemoryPackable(GenerateType.VersionTolerant)] | ||
| [MessagePackObject] | ||
| [Serializable] | ||
| [GenerateSerializer] | ||
| [Alias(nameof(ServerInput))] | ||
| public sealed partial record ServerInput( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Conflict Due to Multiple Serialization Attributes
The ServerInput record is decorated with multiple serialization attributes: [DataContract], [MemoryPackable(GenerateType.VersionTolerant)], [MessagePackObject], [Serializable], [GenerateSerializer], and [Alias(nameof(ServerInput))]. Using multiple serialization frameworks simultaneously can lead to conflicts or unexpected behavior during serialization and deserialization processes.
Consider standardizing on a single serialization approach that best fits your application's requirements. Here's a suggested refactor to retain only the necessary attribute:
-[DataContract]
-[MemoryPackable(GenerateType.VersionTolerant)]
-[MessagePackObject]
-[Serializable]
-[GenerateSerializer]
-[Alias(nameof(ServerInput))]
+// Retain the preferred serialization attribute
+[DataContract]
public sealed partial record ServerInput(
// properties
);Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations; | ||
|
|
||
| [Route("api/[controller]")] | ||
| public class ServersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct the ILogger generic type to match ServersController
The ILogger is currently using UsersController instead of ServersController, which could lead to logging issues or confusion.
Apply this diff to fix the generic type:
-public class ServersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase
+public class ServersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<ServersController> logger) : ControllerBase📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public class ServersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase | |
| public class ServersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<ServersController> logger) : ControllerBase |
| #if DEBUG | ||
| using Attributes; | ||
| using Entities; | ||
| using Grains.Interfaces; | ||
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization; | ||
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc; | ||
| using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations; | ||
|
|
||
| [Route("api/[controller]")] | ||
| public class ServersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase | ||
| { | ||
| [HttpPost] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectId] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<ServerDto>> Post([SwaggerIgnore] string id, [FromBody] ServerInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| var serverManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IServerManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | ||
| return await serverManager.CreateServer(input, Guid.Parse(id)); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpGet("{serverId:guid}")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<ServerDto>> Get(Guid serverId) | ||
| { | ||
| var serverManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IServerManager>(serverId); | ||
| return await serverManager.GetServer(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpPatch("{serverId:guid}")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<ServerDto>> Patch(Guid serverId, [FromBody] ServerInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| var serverManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IServerManager>(serverId); | ||
| return await serverManager.UpdateServer(input); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpDelete("{serverId:guid}")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult> Delete(Guid serverId) | ||
| { | ||
| var serverManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IServerManager>(serverId); | ||
| await serverManager.DeleteServer(); | ||
| return Ok(); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| #endif |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Remove #if DEBUG directives from controllers as they are required in production
The verification shows that ChannelsController, UsersController, and ServersController are all wrapped in #if DEBUG directives, while MetadataController is not. This is a critical issue as these controllers provide essential API functionality:
UsersController: Handles user creation, authorization, and user data retrievalServersController: Manages server operationsChannelsController: Manages channel operations and real-time communication
These controllers should be available in all builds, not just debug builds, as they implement core application features. The #if DEBUG directives should be removed from all three controllers.
🔗 Analysis chain
Confirm if ServersController should be included only in debug builds
The entire ServersController class is wrapped in #if DEBUG directives, meaning it will only be included in debug builds. If this controller is intended for production use, consider removing the conditional compilation directives.
To verify if other controllers are conditionally compiled, run the following script:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find controllers that are conditionally compiled with #if DEBUG
# Expected result: List of controller files with #if DEBUG directives, if any
fd --extension cs --glob "src/Argon.Api/Controllers/*Controller.cs" --exec grep -l -E '#if\s+DEBUG' {}
Length of output: 106
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's first check if the Controllers directory exists and list its contents
fd --type f --extension cs --glob "*Controller.cs"
# Then let's check the content of all controller files for any DEBUG directives
fd --type f --extension cs --glob "*Controller.cs" --exec grep -A 5 -B 5 "#if DEBUG" {} \;
# Also check if there are any other conditional compilation directives in controllers
fd --type f --extension cs --glob "*Controller.cs" --exec grep -l "#if" {} \;
Length of output: 1095
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the full content of these controllers to understand the extent of DEBUG directives
echo "=== ChannelsController.cs ===="
cat src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs
echo -e "\n=== UsersController.cs ===="
cat src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs
echo -e "\n=== MetadataController.cs ===="
cat src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs
Length of output: 3989
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 30
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (20)
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs (1)
3-6: Consider standardizing on a single serialization framework.The imports suggest the use of multiple serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, MessagePack). This could lead to increased complexity and potential conflicts.
Consider evaluating your serialization needs and standardizing on a single framework that best meets your requirements. This would simplify the codebase and reduce potential maintenance overhead.
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (1)
11-21: Add XML documentation for interface methods.While the method names are clear, adding XML documentation would help explain:
- Expected behavior
- Parameter constraints
- Possible exceptions
- Return value semantics
Example documentation:
+/// <summary> +/// Allows a user to join the channel. +/// </summary> +/// <param name="userId">The unique identifier of the user joining the channel.</param> +/// <returns>A realtime token for channel access.</returns> [Alias("Join")] Task<RealtimeToken> Join(Guid userId);src/AppHost/Program.cs (1)
13-19: Consider using separate credentials for different services.Using the same username/password for both RabbitMQ and PostgreSQL could pose a security risk. If one service is compromised, all services sharing those credentials become vulnerable.
Consider:
- Using service-specific parameter pairs (e.g.,
rmq-username/rmq-password,pg-username/pg-password)- Implementing a secrets management solution for production deployments
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (2)
34-34: Address the TODO comment about permissions.The comment indicates that permission handling needs to be implemented.
Would you like me to help create a GitHub issue to track the implementation of proper permission handling?
58-59: Consider adding optimistic concurrency control.The current implementation might lead to lost updates in concurrent scenarios.
Consider adding a concurrency token to the Channel entity and handling DbUpdateConcurrencyException:
context.Channels.Update(channel); - await context.SaveChangesAsync(); + try { + await context.SaveChangesAsync(); + } catch (DbUpdateConcurrencyException) { + throw new InvalidOperationException("Channel was modified by another user."); + }src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs (1)
Line range hint
58-71: Consider adding security event logging.The custom token extraction logic should include logging for security-related events (failed authentications, invalid tokens, etc.) to aid in monitoring and debugging.
OnMessageReceived = ctx => { + var logger = ctx.HttpContext.RequestServices.GetRequiredService<ILogger<JwtFeature>>(); if (ctx.Request.Headers .TryGetValue("x-argon-token", out var value)) { ctx.Token = value; + logger.LogDebug("JWT token extracted from custom header"); return Task.CompletedTask; } + logger.LogWarning("Authentication failed: Missing or invalid token"); ctx.Response.StatusCode = 401; return Task.CompletedTask; }src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs (1)
74-77: Consider caching reflection results for better performance.While the LINQ chain is clean and readable, repeatedly using reflection to get attributes can impact performance, especially if this method is called frequently.
Consider caching the flag name mappings:
public static class LiveKitExtensions { + private static readonly Dictionary<SfuPermissionFlags, string> FlagNameCache = + Enum.GetValues<SfuPermissionFlags>() + .ToDictionary( + flag => flag, + flag => flag.GetAttributeOfType<FlagNameAttribute>()?.FlagName + ); + public static List<string> ToList(this SfuPermissionFlags sfuPermissionFlags) - => sfuPermissionFlags.EnumerateFlags() - .Select(permission => permission.GetAttributeOfType<FlagNameAttribute>()) - .Where(x => x is not null) - .Select(attr => attr.FlagName).ToList(); + => sfuPermissionFlags.EnumerateFlags() + .Select(flag => FlagNameCache[flag]) + .Where(name => name is not null) + .ToList();src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs (1)
76-77: Maintain consistent brace style across conditionalsSome if blocks use braces while others don't. Consider using consistent formatting:
- if (str.Length < min || str.Length > max) - throw new Exception($"{obj}: Invalid length"); + if (str.Length < min || str.Length > max) + { + throw new Exception($"{obj}: Invalid length"); + }src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (1)
65-65: Fix spelling error in channel description.The word "anouncements" is misspelled. It should be "announcements".
Apply this diff to fix the spelling:
- CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General anouncements channel", ChannelType.Announcement) + CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General announcements channel", ChannelType.Announcement)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs (1)
67-67: Address TODOs for user presence and channel participants tracking.The TODOs indicate missing critical features for a chat server:
- Server-level user presence (online/offline/in channel)
- Channel-level connected users tracking
These features are essential for real-time chat functionality and should be implemented.
Would you like me to:
- Generate a proposal for implementing user presence tracking?
- Create GitHub issues to track these features?
- Provide example implementations using WebSocket/SignalR for real-time updates?
Also applies to: 88-88
src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/ArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs (3)
30-32: Consider moving HTTP path constants to configuration.The hardcoded path constants
pkgandprefixcould be moved to configuration for better flexibility and maintainability.Consider moving these to the
SfuFeatureSettingsclass:- private const string pkg = "livekit"; - private const string prefix = "/twirp";Then update the
SfuFeatureSettingsclass to include:public class SfuFeatureSettings { public string PackageName { get; set; } = "livekit"; public string PathPrefix { get; set; } = "/twirp"; // ... existing properties }
Line range hint
44-90: Improve error handling and reduce code duplication.The methods share similar patterns for authorization header construction and error handling.
Consider:
- Creating a helper method for header construction
- Adding proper error handling for network failures
- Adding logging for operations
+ private Dictionary<string, string> CreateAuthHeaders(ArgonChannelId channelId) => + new() { { "Authorization", $"Bearer {CreateSystemToken(channelId).value}" } }; public async ValueTask<bool> KickParticipantAsync(ArgonUserId userId, ArgonChannelId channelId) { + try { await RequestAsync("RoomService", "RemoveParticipant", new RoomParticipantIdentity { Identity = userId.ToRawIdentity(), Room = channelId.ToRawRoomId() - }, new Dictionary<string, string> - { - { - "Authorization", $"Bearer {CreateSystemToken(channelId).value}" - } - }); + }, CreateAuthHeaders(channelId)); return true; + } + catch (Exception ex) + { + // Add logging here + throw; + } }
Line range hint
137-154: Improve HTTP request handling resilience.The HTTP request methods could benefit from:
- Retry policies for transient failures
- Configurable timeouts
- Reduced code duplication
Consider implementing a more resilient request handler:
+ private async ValueTask<IFlurlResponse> SendRequestAsync<TReq>( + string service, + string method, + TReq data, + Dictionary<string, string> headers, + CancellationToken ct) + { + return await httpClient + .Request($"{prefix}/{pkg}.{service}/{method}") + .WithHeaders(headers) + .WithTimeout(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(30)) // Configurable timeout + .AllowAnyHttpStatus() + .PostJsonAsync(data, cancellationToken: ct) + .WaitAsync(ct); // Additional cancellation support + } public async ValueTask<TResp> RequestAsync<TReq, TResp>( string service, string method, TReq data, Dictionary<string, string> headers, CancellationToken ct = default) { - var response = await httpClient - .Request($"{prefix}/{pkg}.{service}/{method}") - .WithHeaders(headers) - .AllowAnyHttpStatus() - .PostJsonAsync(data, cancellationToken: ct); + var response = await SendRequestAsync(service, method, data, headers, ct); if (response.StatusCode != 200) throw new SfuRPCExceptions(response.StatusCode, await response.GetStringAsync()); return await response.GetJsonAsync<TResp>(); }src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.cs (1)
1-145: Consider enhancing the schema design with additional featuresConsider the following architectural improvements:
- Add soft delete support for Servers table (similar to Users.DeletedAt)
- Add audit fields (created_by, updated_by) to track who made changes
- Add a composite unique constraint on (UserId, ServerId) in UsersToServerRelations to prevent duplicate relations
- Consider adding a version column for optimistic concurrency control
Would you like me to provide the SQL modifications for these enhancements?
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/ApplicationDbContextModelSnapshot.cs (1)
66-94: Enhance Server entity indexing and validation.Consider the following improvements:
- Add an index on Name to optimize server search functionality
- Add URL format validation and reasonable length constraint for AvatarUrl
Consider updating the entity configuration:
modelBuilder.Entity("Argon.Api.Entities.Server", b => { // ... existing configuration ... + b.HasIndex("Name"); // For efficient server search b.Property(e => e.AvatarUrl) .HasMaxLength(255) + .HasAnnotation("RegularExpression", @"^https?://.*$"); // Ensure valid URL format });src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs (3)
10-10: Update the logger type to match the classThe logger is currently of type
ILogger<UserManager>, but it should beILogger<SessionManager>to reflect the correct logging context.Apply this diff:
-ILogger<UserManager> logger, +ILogger<SessionManager> logger,
47-48: Rename parameter to follow C# naming conventionsThe parameter
Usershould be renamed touserto adhere to the camelCase naming convention for parameters in C#.Apply this diff:
-private async Task<JwtToken> GenerateJwt(User User) - => new(await managerService.GenerateJwt(User.Email, User.Id)); +private async Task<JwtToken> GenerateJwt(User user) + => new(await managerService.GenerateJwt(user.Email, user.Id));
44-45: Implement theLogoutmethod or remove it if unnecessaryThe
Logoutmethod currently throwsNotImplementedException. If logout functionality is required, consider implementing it. Otherwise, if it's not needed at this time, you might remove it to prevent unhandled exceptions.src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs (2)
7-12: Clarify and finalize theServerRoleenumeration.The TODO comment indicates that the roles and their handling need to be sorted out. Defining clear roles is crucial for consistent permission management and authorization logic across the application.
Would you like assistance in defining the roles and their responsibilities? I can help suggest a structure or implement role-based access control patterns.
55-56: Review the use of multiple serialization attributes.The
UsersToServerRelationDtorecord is decorated with several serialization attributes:
[DataContract][MemoryPackable][MessagePackObject][Serializable][GenerateSerializer][Alias]Using multiple serialization frameworks can increase complexity and potential maintenance overhead.
Consider consolidating to a single serialization framework that best fits your application's needs to improve maintainability and reduce potential conflicts.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (51)
Directory.Build.props(1 hunks)GitVersion.yml(1 hunks)src/AppHost/AppHost.csproj(1 hunks)src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/AppHost/Program.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Argon.Api.csproj(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ServersController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationDbContext.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Extensions/OrleansExtension.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Extensions/SwaggerExtension.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/ArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs(6 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/IArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/Models.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuFeature.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/GlobalVersion.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/ISessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/FusionSession.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UsersJoinedToChannel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/FusionGrain.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.Designer.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/ApplicationDbContextModelSnapshot.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/WarmUpExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Program.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/Argon.Contracts.csproj(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs(2 hunks)src/ServiceDefaults/Extensions.cs(2 hunks)src/ServiceDefaults/ServiceDefaults.csproj(1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (13)
- Directory.Build.props
- GitVersion.yml
- src/Argon.Api/Extensions/SwaggerExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/IArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuFeature.cs
- src/Argon.Api/GlobalVersion.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/FusionSession.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains/FusionGrain.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.Designer.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/WarmUpExtensions.cs
- src/Argon.Contracts/Argon.Contracts.csproj
- src/ServiceDefaults/Extensions.cs
- src/ServiceDefaults/ServiceDefaults.csproj
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (19)
- src/AppHost/AppHost.csproj
- src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Argon.Api.csproj
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ServersController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationDbContext.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/ISessionManager.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UsersJoinedToChannel.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Program.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs
- src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs
🔇 Additional comments (38)
src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/Models.cs (3)
8-8: LGTM! Note the addition of the Alias attribute.
The attribute consolidation improves readability. The new [Alias] attribute helps with serialization naming consistency.
14-14: LGTM! Clean refactor to expression-bodied member.
The refactoring maintains the same functionality while making the code more concise.
22-22: LGTM! Verify the room ID format usage.
The refactoring to expression-bodied member is clean. Since this format is used for room identification, let's verify its usage across the codebase.
✅ Verification successful
Room ID format is consistently used across the codebase
The room ID format {serverId:N}:{channelId:N} is used consistently in both Models.cs and SfuPermissionFlags.cs. The format is identical in both occurrences, ensuring consistency in room identification throughout the SFU feature implementation.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the room ID format usage consistency
# Expected format: "{serverid:N}:{channelid:N}" where N is the "N" format specifier for GUIDs
# Search for room ID format usage
rg -A 2 ':[a-f0-9]{32}'
# Search for potential parsing of this format
rg -A 2 'Split\(":"\)'
Length of output: 50
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find room ID format usage and parsing
# Search for the method name and its usages
rg -A 2 "GetRoomId"
# Search for string formatting with GUID and colon
rg -A 2 '\{.*:N\}:'
# Search for string operations with colon in the context of room or channel
rg -A 2 -i 'room.*split|channel.*split'
# Search for potential room ID parsing patterns
rg -A 2 '\w+Id\.ToString\("N"\)'
Length of output: 496
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs (2)
11-14: LGTM! Good use of DTOs for interface boundaries.
The consistent use of ServerDto instead of internal storage models provides good separation of concerns and encapsulation.
11-20: Verify client compatibility with interface changes.
The switch to DTOs and modified method signatures might impact existing clients.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide a final response:
Interface changes appear to maintain compatibility with existing clients
The changes to IServerManager interface are well-aligned with the current implementation and client usage:
- The
ServersControlleralready uses the newServerInputandServerDtotypes - The contract layer (
IUserInteraction) uses its own DTOs (CreateServerRequest/ServerResponse) which are separate from the internal grain interfaces - The changes are properly encapsulated within the API layer and don't leak to external contracts
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for existing implementations and usages
echo "Searching for implementations of IServerManager..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ : IServerManager'
echo "Searching for usages of the old method signatures..."
rg "CreateServer\(string.*string.*Guid\)"
Length of output: 318
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a more comprehensive search for implementations and usages
# Search for any file containing IServerManager
echo "Files containing IServerManager:"
rg "IServerManager" -l
# Search for ServerManager implementations
echo -e "\nSearching for ServerManager implementations:"
rg "class.*ServerManager.*:" -A 5
# Look for CreateServer method usages with any parameters
echo -e "\nSearching for CreateServer usages:"
rg "CreateServer\(" -A 2
# Look for ServerDto and ServerInput references
echo -e "\nSearching for ServerDto and ServerInput usages:"
rg "ServerDto|ServerInput" -l
Length of output: 2262
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the actual implementation and the contract layer to understand the changes
# Check the UserInteractionService implementation
echo "Checking UserInteractionService implementation:"
rg -A 10 "CreateServerRequest" src/Argon.Contracts/
# Check the ServerDto and ServerInput definitions
echo -e "\nChecking DTO definitions:"
rg -A 10 "class ServerDto|class ServerInput" src/Argon.Api/
# Check the ServersController implementation
echo -e "\nChecking ServersController implementation:"
rg -A 10 "class ServersController" src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ServersController.cs
Length of output: 2782
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (4)
11-21: LGTM! Good interface design.
The interface changes reflect a better domain-driven design:
- User-centric operations (Join/Leave) instead of storage operations
- Appropriate return types (RealtimeToken, ChannelDto)
- Consistent use of Orleans [Alias] attributes
24-35: LGTM! Well-structured record definition.
The ChannelInput record is well-designed with:
- Consistent serialization attributes
- Proper property ordering
- Appropriate nullability
24-35: Verify ServerRole and ChannelType enum definitions.
The record uses ServerRole and ChannelType enums. Let's ensure they are properly defined with appropriate values.
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find and verify enum definitions
# Expected: Find enum definitions with clear values and documentation
echo "Searching for ServerRole enum definition..."
ast-grep --pattern 'enum ServerRole {
$$$
}'
echo "Searching for ChannelType enum definition..."
ast-grep --pattern 'enum ChannelType {
$$$
}'3-6: Verify the necessity of multiple serialization frameworks.
The code uses three different serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, and MessagePack). While this might be intentional for interoperability, it could introduce maintenance overhead.
Let's check if all these serialization frameworks are consistently used across the codebase:
✅ Verification successful
Let me try a different search strategy to verify the usage of these serialization frameworks:
Multiple serialization frameworks are used consistently across DTOs and are required
The usage of multiple serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, and MessagePack) is intentional and consistent throughout the codebase. All DTOs and records are decorated with attributes from all three frameworks, indicating a deliberate architectural decision for:
- Cross-platform serialization compatibility (DataContract)
- High-performance serialization (MemoryPack)
- Message-based communication (MessagePack)
This pattern is consistently applied across:
- Contract interfaces (
IUserInteraction.cs,IUserAuthorization.cs) - Entity DTOs (
UserDto,ServerDto,ChannelDto) - Grain interfaces (
IChannelManager,IServerManager,IUserManager) - Persistence states (
UsersJoinedToChannel)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check usage patterns of serialization frameworks
# Expected: Find evidence of consistent usage across the codebase
echo "Checking DataContract usage..."
rg "DataContract" -A 2
echo "Checking MemoryPack usage..."
rg "MemoryPack" -A 2
echo "Checking MessagePack usage..."
rg "MessagePack" -A 2
Length of output: 294
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for actual attribute usage and implementations
echo "Checking DataContractAttribute usage..."
rg "\[DataContract" -A 2
echo "Checking MemoryPack attribute/interface usage..."
rg "\[MemoryPack|IMemoryPack" -A 2
echo "Checking MessagePack attribute usage..."
rg "\[MessagePack|IMessagePack" -A 2
# Also check imports to understand the scope
echo "Checking imports of serialization frameworks..."
rg "^using.*\b(System\.Runtime\.Serialization|MemoryPack|MessagePack)\b"
Length of output: 8341
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs (2)
10-21: LGTM! Clean CRUD interface design
The interface methods are well-structured with clear responsibilities. Note that GetUser() uses the grain's key (GUID) for identification, which aligns with Orleans' grain-based architecture.
23-38: Add input validation requirements
While the record structure is well-defined, consider adding validation attributes (e.g., [Required], [EmailAddress], [MinLength]) to ensure data integrity before it reaches the grain.
Example implementation:
public sealed partial record UserCredentialsInput(
- [property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)]
+ [property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)]
+ [Required, EmailAddress]
string Email,
- [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)]
+ [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)]
+ [MinLength(3)]
string? Username,
// ... rest of the properties
- [property: DataMember(Order = 3), MemoryPackOrder(3), Key(3), Id(3)]
+ [property: DataMember(Order = 3), MemoryPackOrder(3), Key(3), Id(3)]
+ [MinLength(8)]
string? Password,The previous review comments about redundant serialization attributes and secure password handling are still applicable.
src/AppHost/Program.cs (4)
6-11: LGTM! Nice formatting improvement.
The parameter declarations are well-organized with consistent alignment, making the configuration more readable.
42-45: Clarify JWT expiration value.
The JWT expiration value of "228" is ambiguous:
- Is this in minutes, hours, or days?
- Consider using a more standard duration (e.g., 24 hours, 7 days)
- Add a comment or use a constant to explain the chosen value
Let's check for JWT usage patterns:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for JWT configuration patterns in the codebase
ast-grep --pattern 'Jwt__Expire = "$_"'34-34: Verify the project reference rename impact.
The project reference has been renamed from "argon-api" to "argonapi". Ensure this change is reflected in:
- Docker compose files
- CI/CD configurations
- Any scripts referencing the service name
Let's check for potential impacts:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for old project reference
rg "argon-api" --type yaml --type json20-30: Well-structured Clickhouse configuration, but consider credential isolation.
The Clickhouse configuration is comprehensive with proper:
- Volume mounts for data persistence and logging
- Explicit port mappings for both HTTP and native client access
- Required environment variables
However, it shares the same credential concern as noted earlier.
Let's verify the port availability:
✅ Verification successful
Port configuration is correctly defined and exclusive to Clickhouse
The ports 8123 (HTTP) and 9000 (native client) are only used by the Clickhouse service, with consistent mapping in both the Program.cs and docker-compose.yaml files. No port conflicts were found in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these ports are used by other services in the compose file
rg -l "8123|9000" --type yaml
Length of output: 4532
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find port usage in yaml files
fd -e yaml -e yml -x cat {} | grep -E "port.*[89][0-9]{3}"
Length of output: 62
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for any numeric occurrences of these ports in the entire codebase
rg "8123|9000" -n
Length of output: 362
src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs (4)
3-11: LGTM! Clean dependency injection setup.
The constructor properly injects the required services using modern C# syntax.
14-27:
Add input validation and uniqueness checks.
The method should validate required fields and ensure email/username uniqueness before creating the user.
Apply this diff to add validation:
public async Task<UserDto> CreateUser(UserCredentialsInput input)
{
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Email) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Username))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Email and username are required.");
+
+ var exists = await context.Users.AnyAsync(u =>
+ u.Email == input.Email ||
+ u.Username == input.Username);
+ if (exists)
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("User with this email or username already exists.");
+
var user = new User
{The previous review comment about password validation is still applicable.
30-41:
Fix asynchronous operation handling.
The Get() call should be awaited properly.
Apply this diff:
public async Task<UserDto> UpdateUser(UserCredentialsInput input)
{
- var user = await Get();
+ var user = await Get().ConfigureAwait(false);The previous review comment about null password handling is still applicable.
44-49:
Add existence check before deletion.
The method should verify if the user exists before attempting deletion.
Apply this diff:
-public Task DeleteUser()
+public async Task<bool> DeleteUser()
{
- var user = context.Users.First(u => u.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+ var user = await context.Users.FirstOrDefaultAsync(u => u.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+ if (user == null)
+ return false;
user.DeletedAt = DateTime.UtcNow;
context.Users.Update(user);
- return context.SaveChangesAsync();
+ await context.SaveChangesAsync();
+ return true;
}The previous review comment about using asynchronous methods is still applicable.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (4)
3-13: LGTM! Well-structured class declaration and dependencies.
The constructor uses modern C# features and follows Orleans best practices for persistent state management.
19-19: Non-English error message needs to be replaced.
44-48: LGTM! Clean implementation of channel retrieval.
The method correctly combines channel data with connected users information.
53-57: Add null checks to prevent data loss.
src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs (2)
15-22: LGTM! Good addition of the JWT expiration configuration.
The new Expires property and updated Deconstruct method are well-implemented. The required modifier ensures the expiration time is always set.
41-54: LGTM! Comprehensive JWT validation configuration.
The JWT validation setup includes all recommended security validations with zero clock skew, which is ideal for precise token expiration handling.
src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs (3)
61-67: LGTM! Clean and well-formatted switch expression.
The refactoring to an expression-bodied member with aligned cases improves readability while maintaining functionality.
71-71: LGTM! Concise and type-safe implementation.
The LINQ-based flag enumeration with proper generic constraints is both efficient and maintainable.
34-35:
Fix duplicate Microphone source in DefaultUser permissions.
The allowedSources array contains TrackSource.Microphone twice, which appears to be a mistake.
Apply this fix:
public static readonly SfuPermission DefaultUser = new(
SfuPermissionFlags.CAN_LISTEN | SfuPermissionFlags.CAN_PUBLISH |
SfuPermissionFlags.ROOM_JOIN,
- [TrackSource.Microphone, TrackSource.Microphone]);
+ [TrackSource.Microphone, TrackSource.Camera]);Likely invalid or redundant comment.
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs (1)
6-13: Previous comment about removing IConfiguration is still applicable
The existing review comment about removing the unused IConfiguration parameter remains valid.
src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs (3)
10-11: LGTM! Method signatures are well-structured.
The method signatures follow good async/await practices and maintain consistent naming conventions.
20-20: LGTM! Robust serialization configuration.
The consistent use of multiple serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, MessagePack) with version tolerance is a good practice that:
- Ensures reliable serialization across different protocols
- Supports multiple client implementations
- Maintains backward compatibility
Also applies to: 26-26, 40-40, 50-50, 69-69, 90-90, 98-98
60-61: Verify the impact of enriched channel response.
The change from List<Guid> to List<ServerDetailsResponse> for Channels provides more detailed information but requires careful consideration:
- Ensure there's no circular reference in the response structure
- Consider the performance impact of larger payload sizes
- Verify that all consumers handle the enriched response correctly
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the response structures to verify potential circular references and usage patterns.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
No circular reference or consumer compatibility issues found
The change from List<Guid> to List<ServerDetailsResponse> is safe because:
ServerDetailsResponseis a simple data record containing primitive types (Guid, string) with no recursive references- The only consumer (
UserInteractionService) already handlesServerDetailsResponseobjects through proper mapping - The service layer correctly transforms the data using type-safe Select projections
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for consumers of ServerResponse to verify they handle the new Channels type
echo "Searching for ServerResponse usage..."
rg -l "ServerResponse" --type cs
# Look for potential circular references in response handling
echo "Checking for potential circular references..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ {
$$$
ServerResponse $_ {
$$$
ServerDetailsResponse $_
$$$
}
$$$
}'
Length of output: 429
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check ServerDetailsResponse structure
echo "Examining ServerDetailsResponse structure..."
rg -A 10 "ServerDetailsResponse" --type cs
# Check how UserInteractionService handles the response
echo "Checking UserInteractionService implementation..."
rg -A 10 "ServerResponse" src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs
Length of output: 4729
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.cs (1)
130-143: LGTM! Down method correctly handles table cleanup
The Down method properly drops tables in the correct order to handle foreign key dependencies.
src/Argon.Api/Migrations/ApplicationDbContextModelSnapshot.cs (1)
203-241: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Review cascade delete behavior and relationship configurations.
The current relationship configuration has potential issues:
- Cascade delete on Server-Channel relationship could lead to unintended data loss
- Missing Channel-User relationship despite UserId being required
- Consider if cascade delete is appropriate for UsersToServerRelation
Let's verify the impact of cascade delete:
Consider updating the relationship configurations:
modelBuilder.Entity("Argon.Api.Entities.Channel", b =>
{
b.HasOne("Argon.Api.Entities.Server", null)
.WithMany("Channels")
.HasForeignKey("ServerId")
- .OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Cascade)
+ .OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict)
.IsRequired();
+
+ b.HasOne("Argon.Api.Entities.User")
+ .WithMany()
+ .HasForeignKey("UserId")
+ .OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict)
+ .IsRequired();
});src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs (3)
22-25: Inconsistent Use of ISessionManager vs. IUserManager
The Authorize and Get methods are using ISessionManager, while the Post method uses IUserManager. Ensure that ISessionManager is the correct interface for user authorization and retrieval. If these operations are related to user management, IUserManager might be more appropriate.
Run the following script to inspect methods available in ISessionManager and IUserManager:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: List methods of ISessionManager and IUserManager interfaces.
fd -I -t f -p 'ISessionManager.cs' 'IUserManager.cs' | xargs -I {} cat {}Also applies to: 29-32
29-29: Verify Usage of [SwaggerIgnore] Attribute on Parameters
The [SwaggerIgnore] attribute is applied to the id parameter. Ensure that this attribute is intended for parameters. Typically, to ignore a parameter in Swagger documentation, a custom attribute or configuration is required.
Run the following script to check the implementation of SwaggerIgnore:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find the definition of SwaggerIgnore attribute.
fd -I -t f 'SwaggerIgnore.cs' --exec cat {} \;28-28: Ensure [InjectId] Attribute Securely Injects User ID
The [InjectId] attribute is used to inject the user's ID from the claims principal. Verify that this attribute correctly retrieves the ID and that it's secure against tampering or forgery.
Run the following script to review the InjectIdAttribute implementation:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Display the code for InjectIdAttribute to verify its correctness.
fd -I -t f 'InjectIdAttribute.cs' --exec cat {} \;src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs (1)
8-14:
Correct the class declaration and constructor syntax
The current class declaration uses invalid syntax for constructors in C#. Classes cannot include constructor parameters directly in their declaration. You should define the constructor inside the class body.
Apply this diff to fix the syntax error:
-public class SessionManager(
- IGrainFactory grainFactory,
- ILogger<UserManager> logger,
- UserManagerService managerService,
- IPasswordHashingService passwordHashingService,
- ApplicationDbContext context
-) : Grain, ISessionManager
-{
+public class SessionManager : Grain, ISessionManager
+{
+ private readonly IGrainFactory grainFactory;
+ private readonly ILogger<SessionManager> logger;
+ private readonly UserManagerService managerService;
+ private readonly IPasswordHashingService passwordHashingService;
+ private readonly ApplicationDbContext context;
+
+ public SessionManager(
+ IGrainFactory grainFactory,
+ ILogger<SessionManager> logger,
+ UserManagerService managerService,
+ IPasswordHashingService passwordHashingService,
+ ApplicationDbContext context)
+ {
+ this.grainFactory = grainFactory;
+ this.logger = logger;
+ this.managerService = managerService;
+ this.passwordHashingService = passwordHashingService;
+ this.context = context;
+ }Likely invalid or redundant comment.
| string Name, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)] | ||
| string? Description, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)] | ||
| string? AvatarUrl |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add input validation for required fields.
While the nullability is correctly specified for optional fields (Description and AvatarUrl), there's no validation ensuring that Name is not empty or just whitespace.
Consider adding validation attributes:
public sealed partial record ServerInput(
[property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)]
+ [Required]
+ [StringLength(100, MinimumLength = 1)]
string Name,
[property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)]
+ [StringLength(500)]
string? Description,
[property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)]
+ [Url]
string? AvatarUrl
);📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)] | |
| string Name, | |
| [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)] | |
| string? Description, | |
| [property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)] | |
| string? AvatarUrl | |
| [property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)] | |
| [Required] | |
| [StringLength(100, MinimumLength = 1)] | |
| string Name, | |
| [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)] | |
| [StringLength(500)] | |
| string? Description, | |
| [property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)] | |
| [Url] | |
| string? AvatarUrl |
|
|
||
| public interface IUserManager : IGrainWithStringKey | ||
| public interface IUserManager : IGrainWithGuidKey |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Breaking change detected: Inconsistent grain key types for IUserManager
The verification revealed several issues with the change from string to GUID keys:
- In
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs, there's a commented code using username (string) as the grain key - In
src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.csandsrc/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs, the code uses existing IDs to get the grain - Only in
src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.csis a new GUID being generated for the grain key
This inconsistency needs to be addressed:
- The
UsersControllercreates new users with GUID keys while other parts of the system might still expect string-based keys - No migration strategy is visible for existing user data
- The change affects multiple components that interact with the
IUserManagergrain
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the impact of changing grain key type from string to GUID
The change from IGrainWithStringKey to IGrainWithGuidKey is a breaking change that affects grain addressing.
Let's verify the impact:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any string-based grain references that might need updating
rg -l "GetGrain<IUserManager>\(.*string"
# Check for existing implementations
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ : IUserManager'
Length of output: 89
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search to find any references to IUserManager grain
rg -A 3 "GetGrain<IUserManager>"
# Look for UserManager implementation class
rg -l "UserManager.*IUserManager"
# Check for any string-based key usage with UserManager
rg -A 3 "UserManager.*string"
# Look for any migration or data conversion related files
fd -e cs -e sql migration
Length of output: 1490
| options.ConnectionString = | ||
| builder.Configuration | ||
| .GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Validate connection string configuration.
The connection string is accessed directly without validation. If the configuration key is missing or the value is null/empty, this could lead to runtime errors.
Add validation:
-options.ConnectionString =
- builder.Configuration
- .GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection");
+var connectionString = builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection");
+if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(connectionString))
+{
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("Database connection string 'DefaultConnection' is not configured.");
+}
+options.ConnectionString = connectionString;📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| options.ConnectionString = | |
| builder.Configuration | |
| .GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection"); | |
| var connectionString = builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection"); | |
| if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(connectionString)) | |
| { | |
| throw new InvalidOperationException("Database connection string 'DefaultConnection' is not configured."); | |
| } | |
| options.ConnectionString = connectionString; |
| => new(MemoryPackSerializer.Serialize(input)); | ||
|
|
||
| public T Deserialize<T>(BinaryData input) | ||
| { | ||
| return MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ?? throw new InvalidOperationException(); | ||
| } | ||
| => MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ?? throw new InvalidOperationException(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance error handling in serializer implementation.
The current implementation has several potential issues:
- Generic
InvalidOperationExceptiondoesn't provide enough context for debugging - Missing input validation
- No handling of potential serialization errors
Consider applying these improvements:
public BinaryData Serialize<T>(T input)
- => new(MemoryPackSerializer.Serialize(input));
+{
+ ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(input);
+ try
+ {
+ return new(MemoryPackSerializer.Serialize(input));
+ }
+ catch (Exception ex)
+ {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException($"Failed to serialize type {typeof(T).Name}", ex);
+ }
+}
public T Deserialize<T>(BinaryData input)
- => MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ?? throw new InvalidOperationException();
+{
+ ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(input);
+ try
+ {
+ return MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ??
+ throw new InvalidOperationException($"Deserialization of type {typeof(T).Name} resulted in null");
+ }
+ catch (Exception ex) when (ex is not InvalidOperationException)
+ {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException($"Failed to deserialize type {typeof(T).Name}", ex);
+ }
+}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| => new(MemoryPackSerializer.Serialize(input)); | |
| public T Deserialize<T>(BinaryData input) | |
| { | |
| return MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ?? throw new InvalidOperationException(); | |
| } | |
| => MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ?? throw new InvalidOperationException(); | |
| } | |
| public BinaryData Serialize<T>(T input) | |
| { | |
| ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(input); | |
| try | |
| { | |
| return new(MemoryPackSerializer.Serialize(input)); | |
| } | |
| catch (Exception ex) | |
| { | |
| throw new InvalidOperationException($"Failed to serialize type {typeof(T).Name}", ex); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| public T Deserialize<T>(BinaryData input) | |
| { | |
| ArgumentNullException.ThrowIfNull(input); | |
| try | |
| { | |
| return MemoryPackSerializer.Deserialize<T>(input) ?? | |
| throw new InvalidOperationException($"Deserialization of type {typeof(T).Name} resulted in null"); | |
| } | |
| catch (Exception ex) when (ex is not InvalidOperationException) | |
| { | |
| throw new InvalidOperationException($"Failed to deserialize type {typeof(T).Name}", ex); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } |
| .Configure<ClusterOptions>(cluster => | ||
| { | ||
| cluster.ClusterId = "Api"; | ||
| cluster.ServiceId = "Api"; | ||
| }) | ||
| .AddAdoNetGrainStorage("OrleansStorage", options => | ||
| .AddAdoNetGrainStorage("OrleansStorage", options => | ||
| { | ||
| options.Invariant = "Npgsql"; | ||
| options.ConnectionString = builder.Configuration.GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection"); | ||
| options.GrainStorageSerializer = new MemoryPackStorageSerializer(); | ||
| options.ConnectionString = | ||
| builder.Configuration | ||
| .GetConnectionString("DefaultConnection"); | ||
| options.GrainStorageSerializer = | ||
| new MemoryPackStorageSerializer(); | ||
| }) | ||
| .AddMemoryGrainStorageAsDefault() | ||
| .UseLocalhostClustering(); | ||
| .AddMemoryGrainStorageAsDefault() | ||
| .UseLocalhostClustering(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Based on the gathered evidence, I can now provide the final response:
Production-ready Orleans clustering configuration required
The current implementation only uses development-focused configurations:
- Localhost clustering is hardcoded in OrleansExtension.cs
- Database connection strings lack SSL/TLS configuration
- No environment-specific Orleans clustering configuration exists
Required changes:
- Move Orleans configuration to appsettings.json with environment-specific overrides
- Add production clustering options (e.g., Azure/AWS/GCP)
- Enhance PostgreSQL connection with SSL and connection pooling settings
- Add retry policies for grain storage operations
Example configuration structure:
{
"Orleans": {
"ClusterId": "Api",
"ServiceId": "Api",
"Storage": {
"ConnectionString": "Host=db;Port=5432;Username=user;Password=pass;Database=orleans;SSL Mode=Require",
"UsePooling": true,
"MinPoolSize": 5,
"MaxPoolSize": 100
},
"Clustering": {
"Provider": "Azure", // or AWS/GCP
"ConnectionString": "..."
}
}
}🔗 Analysis chain
Consider environment-specific Orleans configuration.
The current setup uses localhost clustering which is only suitable for development. Additionally, there are security considerations for the database connection.
Consider:
- Environment-specific clustering configuration:
- Development: Localhost clustering
- Production: Azure/AWS/GCP clustering
- Security enhancements:
- Enable SSL/TLS for PostgreSQL connection
- Configure connection pooling
- Add retry policies
Let's check if there are any environment-specific configurations:
Let's examine the content of these configuration files to verify if there are any environment-specific Orleans configurations.
Let's check if there are any environment-specific configuration mechanisms or deployment-related files that might indicate production configuration patterns.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for environment-specific configuration files
fd -e json -e yaml appsettings
Length of output: 176
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check contents of appsettings files
echo "=== src/Argon.Api/appsettings.json ==="
cat src/Argon.Api/appsettings.json
echo -e "\n=== src/Argon.Api/appsettings.Development.json ==="
cat src/Argon.Api/appsettings.Development.json
# Search for any Orleans-related configuration in the codebase
echo -e "\n=== Searching for Orleans configuration patterns ==="
rg -i "orleans|cluster|grain" src/Argon.Api/Program.cs src/Argon.Api/Startup.cs src/Argon.Api/Extensions/OrleansExtension.cs
# Check if there are any other configuration providers
echo -e "\n=== Checking for configuration providers ==="
rg "AddConfiguration|GetConfiguration|IConfiguration" src/Argon.Api/Program.cs src/Argon.Api/Startup.cs
Length of output: 3389
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for deployment or environment configuration files
fd -e yaml -e yml -e json -e env
# Look for any environment-specific code patterns
rg -i "environment\.(is|get)|isprod|isdev|staging|production" src/
# Check for any infrastructure or deployment related files
fd -e tf -e dockerfile -e docker-compose.yml
Length of output: 585
| modelBuilder.Entity("Argon.Api.Entities.Channel", b => | ||
| { | ||
| b.Property<Guid>("Id") | ||
| .ValueGeneratedOnAdd() | ||
| .HasColumnType("uuid"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<int>("AccessLevel") | ||
| .HasColumnType("integer"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<int>("ChannelType") | ||
| .HasColumnType("integer"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<DateTime>("CreatedAt") | ||
| .HasColumnType("timestamp with time zone"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<string>("Description") | ||
| .IsRequired() | ||
| .HasMaxLength(255) | ||
| .HasColumnType("character varying(255)"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<string>("Name") | ||
| .IsRequired() | ||
| .HasMaxLength(255) | ||
| .HasColumnType("character varying(255)"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<Guid>("ServerId") | ||
| .HasColumnType("uuid"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<DateTime>("UpdatedAt") | ||
| .HasColumnType("timestamp with time zone"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.Property<Guid>("UserId") | ||
| .HasColumnType("uuid"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.HasKey("Id"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.HasIndex("ServerId"); | ||
|
|
||
| b.ToTable("Channels"); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add missing indexes and foreign key relationship for Channel entity.
The Channel entity configuration has several potential improvements:
- UserId is required but lacks a foreign key relationship to the User entity
- Missing index on UserId which would be needed for efficient user-based queries
- Consider adding a unique composite index on (ServerId, Name) to ensure channel names are unique within a server
Consider updating the entity configuration:
modelBuilder.Entity("Argon.Api.Entities.Channel", b =>
{
// ... existing configuration ...
b.HasIndex("ServerId");
+ b.HasIndex("UserId");
+ b.HasIndex("ServerId", "Name").IsUnique();
+ b.HasOne("Argon.Api.Entities.User")
+ .WithMany()
+ .HasForeignKey("UserId")
+ .OnDelete(DeleteBehavior.Restrict)
+ .IsRequired();
});Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Post([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| var channels = await userManager.GetServerChannels(serverId); | ||
| return channels.ToList(); | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | ||
| return await userManager.CreateUser(input); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Implement Proper Error Handling in Controller Methods
Currently, exceptions thrown by grain methods (CreateUser, Authorize, GetUser) may not be handled, potentially leading to unhandled exceptions and 500 Internal Server Errors.
Consider adding try-catch blocks or using ASP.NET Core's exception handling to return meaningful HTTP responses:
public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Post([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input)
{
var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid());
+ try
+ {
return await userManager.CreateUser(input);
+ }
+ catch (Exception ex)
+ {
+ logger.LogError(ex, "Error creating user");
+ return StatusCode(StatusCodes.Status500InternalServerError, "An error occurred while creating the user.");
+ }
}
// Apply similar changes to the Authorize and Get methodsAlso applies to: 22-25, 29-32
| #if DEBUG | ||
| using Attributes; | ||
| using Entities; | ||
| using Grains.Interfaces; | ||
| using Grains.Persistence.States; | ||
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization; | ||
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc; | ||
| using Sfu; | ||
|
|
||
| #if DEBUG | ||
| public record UserInputDto(string Username, string Password); | ||
|
|
||
| public record ServerInputDto( | ||
| string Name, | ||
| string Description); | ||
| using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Potential Compilation Issues Due to Conditional Compilation
The using directives are enclosed within #if DEBUG preprocessor directives. This means that in Release builds, these namespaces won't be included, potentially leading to compilation errors if any types from these namespaces are used outside of the #if DEBUG block.
Apply this diff to move the using statements outside the #if DEBUG block:
-#if DEBUG
using Attributes;
using Entities;
using Grains.Interfaces;
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization;
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc;
using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations;
-#endif
+using Attributes;
+using Entities;
+using Grains.Interfaces;
+using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization;
+using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc;
+using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations;Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| #if DEBUG | ||
| public record UserInputDto(string Username, string Password); | ||
|
|
||
| public record ServerInputDto( | ||
| string Name, | ||
| string Description); | ||
| using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations; | ||
|
|
||
| [Route("api/[controller]")] | ||
| public class UsersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase | ||
| { | ||
| [HttpPost] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserStorageDto>> Post([FromBody] UserInputDto dto) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(dto.Username); | ||
| return await userManager.Create(dto.Password); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpPost("authenticate")] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<string>> Authenticate([FromBody] UserInputDto dto) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(dto.Username); | ||
| var token = await userManager.Authorize(dto.Password); | ||
| return token; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpGet] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectUsername] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserStorageDto>> Get(string username) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.Get(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpGet("{username}")] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserStorageDto>> GetByUsername(string username) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.Get(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpPost("server")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectUsername] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<ServerStorage>> CreateServer(string username, [FromBody] ServerInputDto dto) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.CreateServer(dto.Name, dto.Description); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpGet("servers")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectUsername] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<List<ServerStorage>>> GetServers(string username) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.GetServers(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpGet("servers/{serverId}/channels")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectUsername] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<IEnumerable<ChannelStorage>>> GetServerChannels(string username, Guid serverId) | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Post([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| var channels = await userManager.GetServerChannels(serverId); | ||
| return channels.ToList(); | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | ||
| return await userManager.CreateUser(input); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpGet("servers/{serverId}/channels/{channelId}")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectUsername] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<ChannelStorage>> GetChannel(string username, Guid serverId, Guid channelId) | ||
| [HttpPost("Authorize")] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<JwtToken>> Authorize([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.GetChannel(serverId, channelId); | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | ||
| return await userManager.Authorize(input); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [HttpPost("servers/{serverId}/channels/{channelId}/join")] | ||
| [Authorize] | ||
| [InjectUsername] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<RealtimeToken>> JoinChannel(string username, Guid serverId, Guid channelId) | ||
| [HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.JoinChannel(serverId, channelId); | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id)); | ||
| return await userManager.GetUser(); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| #endif |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Entire Controller Excluded in Non-Debug Builds
The entire UsersController class is wrapped inside #if DEBUG ... #endif directives. This means that the controller and its endpoints will not be available in Release builds.
If the controller should be available in all build configurations, remove the conditional compilation directives:
-#if DEBUG
...
code of UsersController
...
-#endif📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| #if DEBUG | |
| using Attributes; | |
| using Entities; | |
| using Grains.Interfaces; | |
| using Grains.Persistence.States; | |
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization; | |
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc; | |
| using Sfu; | |
| #if DEBUG | |
| public record UserInputDto(string Username, string Password); | |
| public record ServerInputDto( | |
| string Name, | |
| string Description); | |
| using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations; | |
| [Route("api/[controller]")] | |
| public class UsersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase | |
| { | |
| [HttpPost] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserStorageDto>> Post([FromBody] UserInputDto dto) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(dto.Username); | |
| return await userManager.Create(dto.Password); | |
| } | |
| [HttpPost("authenticate")] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<string>> Authenticate([FromBody] UserInputDto dto) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(dto.Username); | |
| var token = await userManager.Authorize(dto.Password); | |
| return token; | |
| } | |
| [HttpGet] | |
| [Authorize] | |
| [InjectUsername] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserStorageDto>> Get(string username) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.Get(); | |
| } | |
| [HttpGet("{username}")] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserStorageDto>> GetByUsername(string username) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.Get(); | |
| } | |
| [HttpPost("server")] | |
| [Authorize] | |
| [InjectUsername] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<ServerStorage>> CreateServer(string username, [FromBody] ServerInputDto dto) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.CreateServer(dto.Name, dto.Description); | |
| } | |
| [HttpGet("servers")] | |
| [Authorize] | |
| [InjectUsername] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<List<ServerStorage>>> GetServers(string username) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.GetServers(); | |
| } | |
| [HttpGet("servers/{serverId}/channels")] | |
| [Authorize] | |
| [InjectUsername] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<IEnumerable<ChannelStorage>>> GetServerChannels(string username, Guid serverId) | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Post([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| var channels = await userManager.GetServerChannels(serverId); | |
| return channels.ToList(); | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | |
| return await userManager.CreateUser(input); | |
| } | |
| [HttpGet("servers/{serverId}/channels/{channelId}")] | |
| [Authorize] | |
| [InjectUsername] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<ChannelStorage>> GetChannel(string username, Guid serverId, Guid channelId) | |
| [HttpPost("Authorize")] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<JwtToken>> Authorize([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.GetChannel(serverId, channelId); | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | |
| return await userManager.Authorize(input); | |
| } | |
| [HttpPost("servers/{serverId}/channels/{channelId}/join")] | |
| [Authorize] | |
| [InjectUsername] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<RealtimeToken>> JoinChannel(string username, Guid serverId, Guid channelId) | |
| [HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.JoinChannel(serverId, channelId); | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id)); | |
| return await userManager.GetUser(); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| #endif | |
| using Attributes; | |
| using Entities; | |
| using Grains.Interfaces; | |
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Authorization; | |
| using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc; | |
| using Swashbuckle.AspNetCore.Annotations; | |
| [Route("api/[controller]")] | |
| public class UsersController(IGrainFactory grainFactory, ILogger<UsersController> logger) : ControllerBase | |
| { | |
| [HttpPost] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Post([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | |
| return await userManager.CreateUser(input); | |
| } | |
| [HttpPost("Authorize")] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<JwtToken>> Authorize([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | |
| return await userManager.Authorize(input); | |
| } | |
| [HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id)); | |
| return await userManager.GetUser(); | |
| } | |
| } |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | ||
| return await userManager.CreateUser(input); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Grain ID Usage Needs Correction
The review comment is correct. Based on the codebase analysis:
-
In
UsersController.cs,Guid.NewGuid()is incorrectly used for bothIUserManagerandISessionManagergrain activation:var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.NewGuid());
-
Other parts of the codebase show correct grain ID usage patterns:
ServerManager.csusescreatorIdandserver.IdChannelsController.csuses consistentchannelIdSessionManager.csusesthis.GetPrimaryKey()
The random GUID generation will create a new grain instance on every request, which breaks the grain's state management and identity guarantees. The user manager should use a consistent identifier based on the user's identity.
🔗 Analysis chain
Use Consistent Grain Identifiers
Using Guid.NewGuid() when accessing grains will create a new grain instance each time. If the intention is to interact with the same grain instance, consider using a consistent identifier.
Run the following script to find all usages of GetGrain and check the identifiers used:
Also applies to: 24-25
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all usages of GetGrain<T>() to verify grain keys.
rg --type cs 'GetGrain<\w+>\s*\(' -A 1
Length of output: 143
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find GetGrain usage patterns
rg --type-add 'csharp:*.cs' --type csharp 'GetGrain' -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 7943
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Also search specifically for IUserManager grain usage
rg --type-add 'csharp:*.cs' --type csharp 'IUserManager' -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 2410
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for grain interface definitions to understand the expected key types
fd -e cs -x grep -l "interface.*IGrain" {} \; -exec cat {} \;
Length of output: 207
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find grain interfaces
fd -e cs -x grep -l "interface.*IGrain" {} \;
Length of output: 296
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for IUserManager interface definition
fd -e cs -x grep -A 5 "interface IUserManager" {} \;
Length of output: 220
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 10
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (9)
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserAuthorization.cs (1)
10-10: Address the TODO comment regarding machineKey.The TODO comment suggests that machine key functionality is missing, which could be important for security or encryption purposes.
Would you like me to help implement the machine key functionality or create a GitHub issue to track this task?
src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs (2)
15-18: Add input validation attributes.Consider adding validation attributes to the
UserCredentialsInputmodel and the[ProducesResponseType]attributes to document possible response types:[HttpPost] +[ProducesResponseType(typeof(UserDto), StatusCodes.Status200OK)] +[ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status400BadRequest)] public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Post([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input)
13-33: Consider comprehensive architectural improvements.The controller has several architectural concerns that should be addressed:
Separation of Concerns: The controller inconsistently uses both
IUserManagerandISessionManagerfor user-related operations. Consider consolidating user operations underIUserManagerand session operations underISessionManager.Grain Activation Strategy: Implement a consistent strategy for grain activation:
- User operations should use a deterministic user ID
- Session operations should use a session ID
- Avoid using
Guid.NewGuid()as it creates new grain instances on every requestGlobal Error Handling: Consider implementing a global exception filter to handle common exceptions:
- Unauthorized access
- Invalid input
- Not found scenarios
- Orleans-specific exceptions
src/AppHost/Program.cs (1)
19-30: Consider security and operational improvements for Clickhouse configuration.While the basic setup is functional, consider the following improvements:
- Use separate credentials for Clickhouse instead of reusing credentials from other services
- Add health checks to ensure proper container orchestration
- Configure resource limits to prevent resource exhaustion
- Add specific mount options for volumes to ensure proper permissions and performance
Example improvements:
var clickhouseResource = new ClickhouseBuilderExtension("clickhouse", username, password); var clickhouse = builder .AddResource(clickhouseResource) .WithImage("clickhouse/clickhouse-server") .WithVolume("clickhouse-data", "/var/lib/clickhouse") .WithVolume("logs", "/var/log/clickhouse-server") + .WithEnvironment("CLICKHOUSE_USER", builder.AddParameter("clickhouse-user", true)) + .WithEnvironment("CLICKHOUSE_PASSWORD", builder.AddParameter("clickhouse-password", true)) .WithEnvironment("CLICKHOUSE_DB", username) .WithEnvironment("CLICKHOUSE_DEFAULT_ACCESS_MANAGEMENT", "1") + .WithHttpHealthCheck("/ping") + .WithEndpoint(9000, 9000, "tcp", healthCheck: true) + .WithHttpEndpoint(8123, 8123, healthCheck: true) - .WithHttpEndpoint(8123, 8123) // http endpoint - .WithEndpoint(9000, 9000); // native client endpoint + .WithResourceLimit(cpu: 2, memoryGB: 4);src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (1)
33-33: Address the TODO comment about permissions.The comment indicates that permission handling needs to be implemented. This could lead to security issues if not properly addressed.
Would you like me to help design a proper permission system for the SFU integration?
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs (2)
47-70: Improve error message structure for password validationConsider extracting the validation error messages into constants or a resource file for better maintainability and localization support.
+ private static class ValidationMessages + { + public const string PasswordRequiresDigit = "Password must contain at least one digit"; + public const string PasswordRequiresUpper = "Password must contain at least one uppercase letter"; + public const string PasswordRequiresLower = "Password must contain at least one lowercase letter"; + } private Task ValidatePasswordStrength(string password) { if (!password.Any(char.IsDigit)) { - throw new Exception("Password must contain at least one digit"); + throw new Exception(ValidationMessages.PasswordRequiresDigit); } if (!password.Any(char.IsUpper)) { - throw new Exception("Password must contain at least one uppercase letter"); + throw new Exception(ValidationMessages.PasswordRequiresUpper); } if (!password.Any(char.IsLower)) { - throw new Exception("Password must contain at least one lowercase letter"); + throw new Exception(ValidationMessages.PasswordRequiresLower); }
73-78: Improve length validation error messageThe error message could be more informative by including the actual constraints.
private Task ValidateLength(string str, string obj, int min, int max) { if (str.Length < min || str.Length > max) - throw new Exception($"{obj}: Invalid length"); + throw new Exception($"{obj} length must be between {min} and {max} characters"); return Task.CompletedTask; }src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (2)
38-39: Consider implementing caching for server data.Frequent server data retrieval could impact performance. Consider implementing caching using Orleans' grain state or a distributed cache.
Example implementation with grain state:
+private IPersistentState<ServerDto> _serverCache; + public async Task<ServerDto> GetServer() - => await Get(); +{ + if (_serverCache.State != null) + return _serverCache.State; + + var server = await Get(); + _serverCache.State = server; + await _serverCache.WriteStateAsync(); + return server; +}
63-63: Fix spelling error in channel description.The word "anouncements" is misspelled. It should be "announcements".
- CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General anouncements channel", ChannelType.Announcement), + CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General announcements channel", ChannelType.Announcement),
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (44)
src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/AppHost/Program.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectIdAttribute.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ServersController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/UsersController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationDbContext.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Extensions/OrleansExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Extensions/SwaggerExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/ArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/IArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/Models.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuFeature.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/GlobalVersion.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/ISessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/FusionSession.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UsersJoinedToChannel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/FusionGrain.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/WarmUpExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Program.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserAuthorization.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs(1 hunks)src/ServiceDefaults/Extensions.cs(1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (34)
- src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Attributes/InjectIdAttribute.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ServersController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/ApplicationDbContext.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Extensions/OrleansExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Extensions/SwaggerExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/ArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/IArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/Models.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuFeature.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs
- src/Argon.Api/GlobalVersion.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/ISessionManager.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/FusionSession.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/UsersJoinedToChannel.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains/FusionGrain.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Helpers/Gravatar.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Helpers/SecureRandom.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/WarmUpExtensions.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Program.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Services/UserInteractionService.cs
- src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs
- src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs
- src/ServiceDefaults/Extensions.cs
🔇 Additional comments (25)
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (4)
11-21: LGTM! Clean and consistent interface design.
The interface methods are well-structured with:
- Consistent use of [Alias] attributes
- Clear async/await pattern
- Strong typing with Guid for user identification
- Use of DTOs for data transfer
11-21: Verify channel creation workflow changes.
The interface no longer includes a CreateChannel method. This suggests a significant change in how channels are created and managed.
Let's verify the new channel creation workflow:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Investigate channel creation workflow
# Expected: Find where channel creation has moved to
# Look for channel creation patterns in the codebase
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ {
$$$
CreateChannel($$$) {
$$$
}
$$$
}'
# Check for potential channel creation endpoints
rg -A 5 "CreateChannel|AddChannel|NewChannel" --type cs24-35: Verify access control implementation.
The ChannelInput record includes ServerRole for access control. This is a critical security feature that needs careful implementation.
Let's verify the access control implementation:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify access control implementation
# Expected: Find proper validation and enforcement of ServerRole
# Look for ServerRole enum definition and usage
rg -A 5 "enum ServerRole" --type cs
# Check for access control validation
ast-grep --pattern 'if ($_.AccessLevel $$$) {
$$$
}'
# Look for role-based security attributes
rg -A 2 "\[Authorize" --type cs3-6: The previous script execution seems to have failed to show the actual results for our serialization framework queries. Let's try a different approach to verify the usage patterns:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for files using MemoryPack
echo "=== Files using MemoryPack ==="
rg -l "using MemoryPack" --type cs
# Search for files using MessagePack
echo -e "\n=== Files using MessagePack ==="
rg -l "using MessagePack" --type cs
# Search for files using DataContract
echo -e "\n=== Files using DataContract ==="
rg -l "using System.Runtime.Serialization" --type cs
# Look for actual attribute usage
echo -e "\n=== Attribute Usage Patterns ==="
rg "(\[MemoryPackable\]|\[MessagePackObject\]|\[DataContract\])" --type cs -A 1src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs (3)
12-13: LGTM! Well-structured controller definition.
The controller uses modern C# features effectively with proper authorization, routing, and dependency injection.
15-17:
Add error handling for user ID parsing.
The Guid.Parse(id) call will throw an exception if the ID is invalid. This issue was previously identified and should be addressed.
Apply this diff:
public async Task<RealtimeToken> Join([SwaggerIgnore] string id, Guid channelId)
{
- return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).Join(Guid.Parse(id));
+ if (!Guid.TryParse(id, out var userId))
+ {
+ throw new BadHttpRequestException("Invalid user ID format");
+ }
+ return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).Join(userId);
}19-21:
Add error handling for user ID parsing in Leave method.
The same Guid.Parse issue exists in the Leave method.
Apply this diff:
public async Task Leave([SwaggerIgnore] string id, Guid channelId)
{
- await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).Leave(Guid.Parse(id));
+ if (!Guid.TryParse(id, out var userId))
+ {
+ throw new BadHttpRequestException("Invalid user ID format");
+ }
+ await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).Leave(userId);
}src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs (2)
8-8: Breaking change in grain key type previously identified
A comprehensive review of this breaking change from string to GUID keys was already provided in a previous comment. The concerns about inconsistent grain key types and the need for a migration strategy remain valid.
10-21: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Review method signatures and add documentation
Several concerns with the current method signatures:
DeleteUserandGetUserdon't take any parameters, suggesting they might be using implicit grain state. This could lead to confusion about which user is being operated on.- No methods for validation or authorization are visible.
- Missing XML documentation for method behavior and return values.
Consider these improvements:
public interface IUserManager : IGrainWithGuidKey
{
+ /// <summary>
+ /// Creates a new user with the provided credentials
+ /// </summary>
+ /// <param name="input">User credentials and details</param>
+ /// <returns>The created user DTO</returns>
[Alias("CreateUser")]
Task<UserDto> CreateUser(UserCredentialsInput input);
[Alias("UpdateUser")]
Task<UserDto> UpdateUser(UserCredentialsInput input);
[Alias("DeleteUser")]
- Task DeleteUser();
+ Task DeleteUser(Guid userId);
[Alias("GetUser")]
- Task<UserDto> GetUser();
+ Task<UserDto> GetUser(Guid userId);
}src/AppHost/Program.cs (2)
4-10: LGTM! Clean parameter formatting.
The aligned parameter declarations improve readability while maintaining proper configuration management for sensitive data.
32-45:
Improve JWT configuration and verify project reference change.
- The JWT expiration value "228" lacks clarity about its time unit (seconds/minutes/hours?). Consider making it configurable and using a clear time unit.
- The project reference rename from "argon-api" to "argonapi" might affect CI/CD pipelines.
Let's verify the impact of the project reference rename:
Suggested improvements for JWT configuration:
- .WithEnvironment("Jwt__Expire", "228")
+ .WithEnvironment("Jwt__ExpirationMinutes", builder.AddParameter("jwt-expiration-minutes", defaultValue: "60"))src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs (5)
3-13: LGTM! Clean dependency injection setup.
The constructor uses modern C# primary constructor syntax and properly injects the required dependencies.
14-27:
Add input validation and uniqueness checks.
The method should validate required fields and ensure email/username uniqueness before creating the user.
Apply this diff:
public async Task<UserDto> CreateUser(UserCredentialsInput input)
{
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Email) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Username))
+ {
+ throw new ArgumentException("Email and username are required.");
+ }
+
+ var exists = await context.Users.AnyAsync(u =>
+ u.Email == input.Email ||
+ u.Username == input.Username);
+ if (exists)
+ {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("User with this email or username already exists.");
+ }
+
var user = new User
{
Email = input.Email,The previous review comment about password validation before hashing is still applicable.
30-41:
Add validation and conflict checks to update logic.
The update method needs email validation and should check for conflicts when updating email/username.
Apply this diff:
public async Task<UserDto> UpdateUser(UserCredentialsInput input)
{
var user = await Get();
+
+ if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Email))
+ {
+ if (!IsValidEmail(input.Email))
+ {
+ throw new ArgumentException("Invalid email format.");
+ }
+ var emailExists = await context.Users
+ .AnyAsync(u => u.Id != user.Id && u.Email == input.Email);
+ if (emailExists)
+ {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("Email already in use.");
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Username))
+ {
+ var usernameExists = await context.Users
+ .AnyAsync(u => u.Id != user.Id && u.Username == input.Username);
+ if (usernameExists)
+ {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("Username already in use.");
+ }
+ }
+
user.Email = input.Email;
user.Username = input.Username ?? user.Username;
user.PhoneNumber = input.PhoneNumber ?? user.PhoneNumber;The previous review comment about null password checks is still applicable.
44-49:
Add validation for already deleted users.
The method should check if the user is already deleted to prevent multiple soft deletes.
The previous review comment about using asynchronous methods is still applicable.
Apply this diff:
-public Task DeleteUser()
+public async Task DeleteUser()
{
- var user = context.Users.First(u => u.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+ var user = await context.Users.FirstAsync(u => u.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+
+ if (user.DeletedAt.HasValue)
+ {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("User is already deleted.");
+ }
+
user.DeletedAt = DateTime.UtcNow;
context.Users.Update(user);
- return context.SaveChangesAsync();
+ await context.SaveChangesAsync();
}52-61:
Filter out deleted users in queries.
The Get method should exclude soft-deleted users from the results.
The previous review comment about error handling for user not found scenario is still applicable.
Apply this diff:
private async Task<User> Get() =>
await context
.Users
+ .Where(user => !user.DeletedAt.HasValue)
.Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations)
.ThenInclude(x => x.Server)
.ThenInclude(x => x.Channels)
.FirstAsync(user => user.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (6)
3-13: LGTM! Well-structured dependency injection setup.
The constructor properly injects all required dependencies and correctly configures the Orleans persistent state.
19-20: The non-English error message issue remains unfixed.
21-24: Inefficient user lookup query remains.
37-40: Missing validation before user removal remains an issue.
43-47: LGTM! Clean implementation of channel data retrieval.
The method effectively combines channel data with connected users state.
62-63: Missing proper error handling for non-existent channels.
src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs (2)
11-14: Remove unused IConfiguration dependency
The IConfiguration parameter is no longer used since JWT configuration has been moved to strongly-typed options pattern.
16-38: LGTM with minor enhancement opportunities
The JWT generation logic is well-structured and correctly uses the options pattern. The token generation includes all necessary claims and security parameters.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (1)
8-9: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider separating data access concerns from grain logic.
Direct database access within grains can lead to performance issues and violate Orleans' single-threaded execution model. Consider introducing a repository layer to handle data access operations.
Consider refactoring to use a repository pattern:
public class ServerManager(
IGrainFactory grainFactory,
- ApplicationDbContext context
+ IServerRepository serverRepository
) : Grain, IServerManagerLikely invalid or redundant comment.
| // public async Task<AuthorizeResponse> AuthorizeAsync(AuthorizeRequest request) | ||
| // { | ||
| // // TODO machineKey | ||
| // var token = await grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserAuthorizationManager>(Guid.NewGuid()) | ||
| // .Authorize(new UserCredentialsInput(Username: request.username, Password: request.password, | ||
| // Email: request.email, PhoneNumber: request.phoneNumber, GenerateOtp: request.generateOtp, | ||
| // PasswordConfirmation: request.password)); | ||
| // return new AuthorizeResponse(token.token); | ||
| // } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add error handling for the authorization process.
The current implementation lacks error handling for potential failures during the authorization process.
Consider adding proper error handling:
public async Task<AuthorizeResponse> AuthorizeAsync(AuthorizeRequest request)
{
+ try
+ {
+ if (request == null)
+ throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(request));
+
// TODO machineKey
var token = await grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserAuthorizationManager>(Guid.NewGuid())
.Authorize(new UserCredentialsInput(Username: request.username, Password: request.password,
Email: request.email, PhoneNumber: request.phoneNumber, GenerateOtp: request.generateOtp,
PasswordConfirmation: request.password));
+
+ if (token == null || string.IsNullOrEmpty(token.token))
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("Authorization failed to generate token");
+
return new AuthorizeResponse(token.token);
+ }
+ catch (Exception ex) when (ex is not ArgumentNullException && ex is not InvalidOperationException)
+ {
+ // Log the error
+ throw new AuthorizationException("Authorization failed", ex);
+ }
}Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| // .Authorize(new UserCredentialsInput(Username: request.username, Password: request.password, | ||
| // Email: request.email, PhoneNumber: request.phoneNumber, GenerateOtp: request.generateOtp, | ||
| // PasswordConfirmation: request.password)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Improve password validation logic.
The current implementation has potential security issues:
- Password confirmation is set to the same value as password without explicit validation
- No password complexity requirements are enforced
Consider implementing proper password validation:
// Add password validation before creating UserCredentialsInput
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(request.password))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Password cannot be empty");
+ if (request.password != request.passwordConfirmation)
+ throw new ArgumentException("Password and confirmation do not match");
+ if (request.password.Length < 8)
+ throw new ArgumentException("Password must be at least 8 characters long");
var token = await grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserAuthorizationManager>(Guid.NewGuid())
.Authorize(new UserCredentialsInput(
Username: request.username,
Password: request.password,
Email: request.email,
PhoneNumber: request.phoneNumber,
GenerateOtp: request.generateOtp,
- PasswordConfirmation: request.password));
+ PasswordConfirmation: request.passwordConfirmation));Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| [HttpPost("Authorize")] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<JwtToken>> Authorize([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.GetChannel(serverId, channelId); | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.NewGuid()); | ||
| return await userManager.Authorize(input); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance endpoint documentation and consider architectural improvements.
- Add response type attributes and XML documentation.
- Consider moving authorization logic to IUserManager instead of ISessionManager for better separation of concerns.
Apply these improvements:
+/// <summary>
+/// Authenticates a user and returns a JWT token
+/// </summary>
[HttpPost("Authorize")]
+[ProducesResponseType(typeof(JwtToken), StatusCodes.Status200OK)]
+[ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status401Unauthorized)]
+[ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status400BadRequest)]
public async Task<ActionResult<JwtToken>> Authorize([FromBody] UserCredentialsInput input)
{
- var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.NewGuid());
- return await userManager.Authorize(input);
+ var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(0);
+ return await userManager.Authorize(input);
}Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| [HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId] | ||
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) | ||
| { | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | ||
| return await userManager.JoinChannel(serverId, channelId); | ||
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id)); | ||
| return await userManager.GetUser(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add error handling for ID parsing and improve architecture.
- The
Guid.Parsecould throw FormatException. - User data retrieval should be handled by IUserManager instead of ISessionManager.
Apply these improvements:
[HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId]
+[ProducesResponseType(typeof(UserDto), StatusCodes.Status200OK)]
+[ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status400BadRequest)]
+[ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status401Unauthorized)]
public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id)
{
- var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id));
- return await userManager.GetUser();
+ if (!Guid.TryParse(id, out var userId))
+ {
+ return BadRequest("Invalid user ID format");
+ }
+ var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(userId);
+ return await userManager.GetUser(userId);
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| [HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) | |
| { | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(username); | |
| return await userManager.JoinChannel(serverId, channelId); | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<ISessionManager>(Guid.Parse(id)); | |
| return await userManager.GetUser(); | |
| [HttpGet("Me"), Authorize, InjectId] | |
| [ProducesResponseType(typeof(UserDto), StatusCodes.Status200OK)] | |
| [ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status400BadRequest)] | |
| [ProducesResponseType(StatusCodes.Status401Unauthorized)] | |
| public async Task<ActionResult<UserDto>> Get([SwaggerIgnore] string id) | |
| { | |
| if (!Guid.TryParse(id, out var userId)) | |
| { | |
| return BadRequest("Invalid user ID format"); | |
| } | |
| var userManager = grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(userId); | |
| return await userManager.GetUser(userId); | |
| } |
| @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ | |||
| namespace Argon.Api.Controllers; | |||
|
|
|||
| #if DEBUG | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove DEBUG conditional compilation.
The entire controller is wrapped in #if DEBUG which means it won't be available in production builds. This appears to be unintentional as channel management is a core feature that should be available in all environments.
Apply this diff to fix:
-#if DEBUG
namespace Argon.Api.Controllers;
using Attributes;
...
public class ChannelsController(IGrainFactory grainFactory) : ControllerBase
{
// Controller implementation
}
-#endifAlso applies to: 31-31
| [HttpGet, Route("")] | ||
| public async Task<ChannelDto> GetChannel(Guid channelId) => | ||
| await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).GetChannel(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add comprehensive error handling for grain operations.
The grain operations could fail for various reasons (e.g., network issues, channel not found). Add proper error handling to provide meaningful responses.
Apply this pattern to all methods:
public async Task<ChannelDto> GetChannel(Guid channelId)
{
- return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).GetChannel();
+ try
+ {
+ return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).GetChannel();
+ }
+ catch (KeyNotFoundException)
+ {
+ throw new BadHttpRequestException("Channel not found");
+ }
+ catch (Exception ex)
+ {
+ // Log the exception
+ throw new StatusCodeException(StatusCodes.Status500InternalServerError, "Failed to process channel operation");
+ }
}Also applies to: 27-29
| [HttpPut, HttpPatch, Route("")] | ||
| public async Task<ChannelDto> UpdateChannel(Guid channelId, [FromBody] ChannelInput input) => | ||
| await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).UpdateChannel(input); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add input validation for channel updates.
The UpdateChannel method accepts input without validation. Add model validation to ensure data integrity.
Apply this diff:
public async Task<ChannelDto> UpdateChannel(Guid channelId, [FromBody] ChannelInput input)
{
+ if (input == null)
+ {
+ throw new BadHttpRequestException("Channel input cannot be null");
+ }
+
+ if (!ModelState.IsValid)
+ {
+ throw new BadHttpRequestException("Invalid channel input");
+ }
+
return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channelId).UpdateChannel(input);
}Also, ensure ChannelInput has appropriate validation attributes.
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| [property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)] | ||
| string Email, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)] | ||
| string? Username, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)] | ||
| string? PhoneNumber, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 3), MemoryPackOrder(3), Key(3), Id(3)] | ||
| string? Password, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 4), MemoryPackOrder(4), Key(4), Id(4)] | ||
| string? PasswordConfirmation, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 5), MemoryPackOrder(5), Key(5), Id(5)] | ||
| bool GenerateOtp | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add input validation attributes
The UserCredentialsInput record lacks validation attributes for its properties. This could lead to invalid data being processed.
Add validation attributes to ensure data integrity:
public sealed partial record UserCredentialsInput(
[property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)]
+ [Required, EmailAddress, MaxLength(256)]
string Email,
[property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)]
+ [MaxLength(50)]
string? Username,
[property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)]
+ [Phone]
string? PhoneNumber,
[property: DataMember(Order = 3), MemoryPackOrder(3), Key(3), Id(3)]
+ [MinLength(8), MaxLength(100)]
string? Password,
[property: DataMember(Order = 4), MemoryPackOrder(4), Key(4), Id(4)]
+ [Compare(nameof(Password))]
string? PasswordConfirmation,
[property: DataMember(Order = 5), MemoryPackOrder(5), Key(5), Id(5)]
bool GenerateOtp
);Don't forget to add the following using statement:
using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;| public async Task<ChannelDto> UpdateChannel(ChannelInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| channelStore.State = channel; | ||
| await channelStore.WriteStateAsync(); | ||
| return await GetChannel(); | ||
| var channel = await Get(); | ||
| channel.Name = input.Name; | ||
| channel.AccessLevel = input.AccessLevel; | ||
| channel.Description = input.Description ?? channel.Description; | ||
| channel.ChannelType = input.ChannelType; | ||
| context.Channels.Update(channel); | ||
| await context.SaveChangesAsync(); | ||
| return await Get(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Optimize database operations and add null checks.
Two issues need attention:
- Missing null checks for input properties
- Inefficient database operations with multiple calls
Apply these improvements:
public async Task<ChannelDto> UpdateChannel(ChannelInput input)
{
var channel = await Get();
- channel.Name = input.Name;
- channel.AccessLevel = input.AccessLevel;
- channel.Description = input.Description ?? channel.Description;
- channel.ChannelType = input.ChannelType;
+ channel.Name = input.Name ?? channel.Name;
+ channel.AccessLevel = input.AccessLevel ?? channel.AccessLevel;
+ channel.Description = input.Description ?? channel.Description;
+ channel.ChannelType = input.ChannelType ?? channel.ChannelType;
context.Channels.Update(channel);
await context.SaveChangesAsync();
- return await Get();
+ return channel;
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public async Task<ChannelDto> UpdateChannel(ChannelInput input) | |
| { | |
| channelStore.State = channel; | |
| await channelStore.WriteStateAsync(); | |
| return await GetChannel(); | |
| var channel = await Get(); | |
| channel.Name = input.Name; | |
| channel.AccessLevel = input.AccessLevel; | |
| channel.Description = input.Description ?? channel.Description; | |
| channel.ChannelType = input.ChannelType; | |
| context.Channels.Update(channel); | |
| await context.SaveChangesAsync(); | |
| return await Get(); | |
| public async Task<ChannelDto> UpdateChannel(ChannelInput input) | |
| { | |
| var channel = await Get(); | |
| channel.Name = input.Name ?? channel.Name; | |
| channel.AccessLevel = input.AccessLevel ?? channel.AccessLevel; | |
| channel.Description = input.Description ?? channel.Description; | |
| channel.ChannelType = input.ChannelType ?? channel.ChannelType; | |
| context.Channels.Update(channel); | |
| await context.SaveChangesAsync(); | |
| return channel; | |
| } |
| public async Task<ServerDto> CreateServer(ServerInput input, Guid creatorId) | ||
| { | ||
| serverStore.State.Id = this.GetPrimaryKey(); | ||
| serverStore.State.Name = name; | ||
| serverStore.State.Description = description; | ||
| serverStore.State.UpdatedAt = DateTime.UtcNow; | ||
| await serverStore.WriteStateAsync(); | ||
| await CreateDefaultChannels(userId); | ||
| return serverStore.State; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public async Task<string> CreateJoinLink() | ||
| { | ||
| return await Task.Run(() => ""); | ||
| // TODO: register url generator grain for this one line | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public async Task AddUser(UserToServerRelation Relation) | ||
| { | ||
| serverUserStore.State.Users.Add(Relation); | ||
| await serverUserStore.WriteStateAsync(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public async Task<IEnumerable<ChannelStorage>> GetChannels() | ||
| { | ||
| return await Task.WhenAll(serverStore.State.Channels.Select(async channelId => await GetChannel(channelId))); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| public async Task<ChannelStorage> AddChannel(ChannelStorage channel) | ||
| { | ||
| return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IChannelManager>(channel.Id).CreateChannel(channel); | ||
| var user = await grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(creatorId).GetUser(); | ||
| var server = new Server | ||
| { | ||
| Name = input.Name, | ||
| Description = input.Description, | ||
| AvatarUrl = input.AvatarUrl, | ||
| UsersToServerRelations = new List<UsersToServerRelation> | ||
| { | ||
| new() | ||
| { | ||
| UserId = creatorId, | ||
| CustomUsername = user.Username ?? user.Email, | ||
| AvatarUrl = user.AvatarUrl, | ||
| CustomAvatarUrl = user.AvatarUrl, | ||
| Role = ServerRole.Owner, | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| Channels = CreateDefaultChannels(creatorId), | ||
| }; | ||
| context.Servers.Add(server); | ||
| await context.SaveChangesAsync(); | ||
| return await grainFactory.GetGrain<IServerManager>(server.Id).GetServer(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add input validation for server creation.
The method lacks input validation for required fields and potential security checks.
Add validation at the beginning of the method:
public async Task<ServerDto> CreateServer(ServerInput input, Guid creatorId)
{
+ if (input == null)
+ throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(input));
+ if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(input.Name))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Server name is required", nameof(input));
+ if (input.Name.Length > 100) // Adjust length as per requirements
+ throw new ArgumentException("Server name exceeds maximum length", nameof(input));
+
var user = await grainFactory.GetGrain<IUserManager>(creatorId).GetUser();Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
0xF6
force-pushed
the
feature/new-auth
branch
from
1da06dc to
a8a1cd0
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 14
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (18)
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IEmailManager.cs (1)
1-14: Consider adding rate limiting and monitoring capabilities.As this is part of a distributed system handling email operations, consider implementing:
- Rate limiting to prevent abuse of the email service
- Telemetry for monitoring email operations
- Circuit breaker pattern for handling SMTP server failures
- Retry policies for transient failures
Example implementation using Orleans dashboard for monitoring:
public interface IEmailManagerMetrics { void TrackEmailSent(); void TrackEmailFailed(); int GetCurrentRateLimit(); } public interface IEmailManager : IGrainWithGuidKey, IEmailManagerMetrics { // ... existing methods ... }src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (2)
11-21: Consider adding XML documentation for the interface methods.The interface methods are well-designed and follow good practices. However, adding XML documentation would improve maintainability and make the API more developer-friendly.
Example documentation:
+ /// <summary> + /// Allows a user to join the channel and returns a realtime token for connection. + /// </summary> + /// <param name="userId">The unique identifier of the user joining the channel.</param> + /// <returns>A realtime token for establishing connection.</returns> [Alias("Join")] Task<RealtimeToken> Join(Guid userId);
24-33: Consider adding validation attributes for required fields.While the serialization setup is comprehensive, adding validation attributes would ensure data integrity at the API level.
Consider adding validation attributes:
public sealed partial record ChannelInput( [property: DataMember(Order = 0), MemoryPackOrder(0), Key(0), Id(0)] + [Required, MinLength(1), MaxLength(100)] string Name, [property: DataMember(Order = 1), MemoryPackOrder(1), Key(1), Id(1)] + [Required] ServerRole AccessLevel, [property: DataMember(Order = 2), MemoryPackOrder(2), Key(2), Id(2)] + [MaxLength(500)] string? Description, [property: DataMember(Order = 3), MemoryPackOrder(3), Key(3), Id(3)] + [Required] ChannelType ChannelType);src/Argon.Api/Grains/EmailManager.cs (2)
22-25: Adjust debug logging level.Using
LogCriticalfor debug email logging is inappropriate. Consider usingLogInformationorLogDebuginstead.- logger.LogCritical($"Email sent to {email} with subject {subject} and message {message}"); + logger.LogInformation("Debug mode: Would send email to {Email} with subject {Subject}", email, subject);
20-20: Consider implementing a proper email templating system.The
templateparameter suggests a planned feature for email templating. Consider implementing a robust templating system:
- Use a template engine like Razor or Handlebars.NET
- Store templates in a dedicated location
- Support template inheritance and partials
- Add template validation and caching
Would you like me to provide a detailed design proposal for the templating system?
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs (1)
10-21: Add XML documentation for interface methodsThe interface methods lack documentation describing their behavior, parameters, return values, and potential exceptions. This documentation is crucial for maintainability and proper usage.
Add XML documentation like this:
+/// <summary> +/// Creates a new user with the provided credentials. +/// </summary> +/// <param name="input">The user credentials and information.</param> +/// <returns>The created user DTO.</returns> +/// <exception cref="InvalidOperationException">Thrown when user already exists.</exception> [Alias("CreateUser")] Task<UserDto> CreateUser(UserCredentialsInput input);src/Argon.Api/Program.cs (1)
42-46: Security consideration: Version information exposureThe root endpoint exposes detailed version information including the Git SHA. Consider:
- Moving this to a dedicated health/status endpoint
- Limiting the version information in production
- Adding authentication to access this information
-app.MapGet("/", () => new -{ - version = $"{GlobalVersion.FullSemVer}.{GlobalVersion.ShortSha}" -}); +app.MapGet("/health", () => new +{ + status = "healthy", + version = GlobalVersion.FullSemVer +});src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (1)
25-27: Address the TODO comment about permissions.The code contains a TODO comment about sorting out permissions but uses
DefaultUseras a placeholder.Would you like me to help implement a proper permission system or create a GitHub issue to track this task?
src/AppHost/Program.cs (2)
12-15: SMTP configuration looks good, consider security recommendations.The SMTP parameters are properly configured as required parameters. However, for production deployments, consider:
- Using a secrets management service for the SMTP credentials
- Implementing encryption for sensitive parameters
- Adding validation for the SMTP port range
17-18: Consider using separate credentials for different services.Using the same username/password for both RabbitMQ and PostgreSQL could pose a security risk. Consider using service-specific credentials to limit the impact of potential credential compromises.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (3)
36-36: Consider implementing caching for server data.Since server data doesn't change frequently, consider implementing caching to improve performance and reduce database load.
-public async Task<ServerDto> GetServer() => await Get(); +public async Task<ServerDto> GetServer() +{ + return await this.GetCache<ServerDto>() ?? await UpdateCache(); +} + +private async Task<ServerDto> UpdateCache() +{ + var result = await Get(); + await this.SetCache(result); + return result; +}
56-61: Fix parameter naming convention and typo.The parameter
CreatorIdshould follow camelCase naming convention, and there's a typo in "anouncements".-private List<Channel> CreateDefaultChannels(Guid CreatorId) => +private List<Channel> CreateDefaultChannels(Guid creatorId) => [ - CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General text channel", ChannelType.Text), - CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General voice channel", ChannelType.Voice), - CreateChannel(CreatorId, "General", "General anouncements channel", ChannelType.Announcement) + CreateChannel(creatorId, "General", "General text channel", ChannelType.Text), + CreateChannel(creatorId, "General", "General voice channel", ChannelType.Voice), + CreateChannel(creatorId, "General", "General announcements channel", ChannelType.Announcement) ];
63-70: Make channel creation more configurable.Consider making the AccessLevel configurable and fix the parameter naming convention.
-private Channel CreateChannel(Guid CreatorId, string name, string description, ChannelType channelType) => new() +private Channel CreateChannel( + Guid creatorId, + string name, + string description, + ChannelType channelType, + ServerRole accessLevel = ServerRole.User) => new() { Name = name, Description = description, - UserId = CreatorId, + UserId = creatorId, ChannelType = channelType, - AccessLevel = ServerRole.User + AccessLevel = accessLevel };src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs (3)
10-11: Consider using standard C# formatting.The current alignment of method signatures, while visually appealing, deviates from standard C# conventions and could be harder to maintain. Consider using standard C# formatting:
- Task<UserResponse> GetMe(); - Task<ServerResponse> CreateServer(CreateServerRequest request); + Task<UserResponse> GetMe(); + Task<ServerResponse> CreateServer(CreateServerRequest request);
64-64: Address user presence tracking TODOs.The TODOs indicate missing features for tracking user presence at both server and channel levels. These are crucial features for a chat application. Consider implementing:
- Server-level user status (online/offline/in channel)
- Channel-level connected users list
- Real-time status updates using WebSocket/SignalR
Would you like me to:
- Generate a detailed implementation plan for user presence tracking?
- Create GitHub issues to track these features?
Also applies to: 85-85
20-23: Document the purpose of multiple serialization attributes.The codebase uses three different serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, MessagePack). Consider adding documentation to explain:
- Why each serialization framework is needed
- Which scenarios use which serialization method
- Performance implications and trade-offs
This will help maintainers understand the design decisions and ensure proper handling in different contexts.
Also applies to: 25-28, 38-41, 47-50, 66-69, 87-90, 94-97
src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs (2)
42-42: Implement theLogoutmethod or remove it if unnecessaryThe
Logoutmethod currently throws aNotImplementedException. Leaving unimplemented methods can lead to runtime errors if called.Would you like assistance in implementing the logout functionality, or should we remove it until it's ready to be developed?
44-44: Use camelCase for method parameter namesThe parameter
Usershould use camelCase to follow C# naming conventions.Apply this diff to correct the parameter name:
-private async Task<JwtToken> GenerateJwt(User User) => new(await managerService.GenerateJwt(User.Email, User.Id)); +private async Task<JwtToken> GenerateJwt(User user) => new(await managerService.GenerateJwt(user.Email, user.Id));
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (39)
src/AppHost/AppHost.csproj(1 hunks)src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/AppHost/Program.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Argon.Api.csproj(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Extensions/OrleansExtension.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Extensions/SwaggerExtension.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/ArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs(3 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/IArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/Models.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuFeature.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IEmailManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/FusionSession.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/EmailManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/FusionGrain.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241020185058_AddOrleansPersistence.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Program.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs(1 hunks)src/Argon.Api/appsettings.Development.json(1 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs(2 hunks)src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs(2 hunks)src/ServiceDefaults/Extensions.cs(2 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241020185058_AddOrleansPersistence.cs
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (26)
- src/AppHost/AppHost.csproj
- src/AppHost/ClickhouseBuilderExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Argon.Api.csproj
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/ChannelsController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Controllers/MetadataController.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/Channel.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/Server.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/User.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Entities/UsersToServerRelation.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Extensions/OrleansExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Extensions/SwaggerExtension.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Jwt/JwtOptions.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Rpc/FusionAuthorizationMiddleware.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/ArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/IArgonSelectiveForwardingUnit.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/Models.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuFeature.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Features/Sfu/SfuPermissionFlags.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains.Persistence.States/FusionSession.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Grains/FusionGrain.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Migrations/20241105120248_Init.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Services/IPasswordHashingService.cs
- src/Argon.Api/Services/UserManagerService.cs
- src/Argon.Api/appsettings.Development.json
- src/Argon.Contracts/IUserAuthorization.cs
- src/ServiceDefaults/Extensions.cs
🔇 Additional comments (27)
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IServerManager.cs (3)
19-21: Previous comment about DeleteServer method remains valid.
The method still lacks context about which server to delete.
11-14: LGTM! Good use of DTOs.
The change from returning ServerStorage to ServerDto is a good practice as it decouples the internal storage implementation from the API contract.
23-30: Previous comments about serialization attributes and input validation remain valid.
Additionally, let's verify the consistent usage of this record across the codebase.
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify consistent usage of ServerInput across the codebase
# Check for any variations in ServerInput usage
echo "Checking for ServerInput usage patterns..."
rg -A 5 "ServerInput" --type cs
# Check for any direct string name usage that should use ServerInput
echo "Checking for potential places where ServerInput should be used..."
rg "server.*name|server.*description|server.*avatar" --type cssrc/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IChannelManager.cs (2)
3-6: LGTM! All required imports are present.
The necessary imports for serialization and data contracts are correctly included.
11-21: Verify interface implementation updates.
The interface has undergone significant changes. Let's verify that all implementations have been updated accordingly.
✅ Verification successful
No issues found with interface changes
The verification shows that the changes to IChannelManager interface are safe:
- The
CreateChannelmethod found inServerManager.csis a private helper method unrelated to theIChannelManagerinterface - The only implementation of
IChannelManageris inChannelManager.cswhich already implements the new interface methods (Join, Leave, GetChannel, UpdateChannel) - All usages in
ChannelsController.csare aligned with the new interface methods - The commented out reference in
IUserInteraction.csis just a comment
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for implementations and usages of IChannelManager
# Find implementations of IChannelManager
echo "Checking for IChannelManager implementations..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ : $$$, IChannelManager'
# Look for any remaining references to removed methods
echo "Checking for references to removed methods..."
rg "CreateChannel|JoinLink" --type cs
Length of output: 931
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's check the implementation details of ServerManager to understand the CreateChannel usage
# First, check if ServerManager implements IChannelManager
echo "Checking ServerManager implementation..."
ast-grep --pattern 'class ServerManager : $$$'
# Check the actual implementation of CreateChannel in ServerManager
echo "Checking CreateChannel implementation in ServerManager..."
rg "CreateChannel" -A 10 -B 2 src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs
# Look for any direct usages of IChannelManager interface
echo "Checking IChannelManager usages..."
rg "IChannelManager" -A 2 -B 2
Length of output: 3662
src/Argon.Api/Grains/EmailManager.cs (1)
1-8: LGTM! Well-structured class declaration with proper dependency injection.
The class follows good practices by using the options pattern for configuration and proper dependency injection for logging.
src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IUserManager.cs (1)
8-8: Breaking change in grain key type needs attention
The change from IGrainWithStringKey to IGrainWithGuidKey was previously flagged as a breaking change with inconsistencies across the codebase.
src/Argon.Api/Program.cs (4)
16-16: LGTM: SMTP configuration follows best practices
The use of IOptions pattern for SMTP configuration is a good practice for managing external service configurations.
21-22: Security concern: Password hashing service implementation needs review
The singleton registration of IPasswordHashingService is appropriate, but ensure the implementation addresses the security concerns raised in the previous review.
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify if the password hashing implementation has been updated
# Check for secure hashing algorithm usage
rg -A 10 "class PasswordHashingService"
# Check for proper password validation
ast-grep --pattern 'class PasswordHashingService {
$$$
Hash($_) {
$$$
}
}'Line range hint 34-39: LGTM: Middleware configuration follows security best practices
The middleware chain is properly configured with:
- HTTPS redirection
- Authentication before authorization
- WebSockets support
23-26: Verify the impact of commented RPC services
The following critical services appear to be disabled:
- User Authorization
- User Interaction
- WebSocket Server
Please clarify if these services have been replaced with alternative implementations or if this is intentional.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/UserManager.cs (5)
3-9: LGTM! Clean dependency injection setup.
The class follows good practices with constructor injection and proper inheritance hierarchy.
48-51: Optimize database queries with selective loading.
The current Include chain loads all related data eagerly, which might be unnecessary for all use cases.
Consider implementing selective loading based on the use case:
-private async Task<User> Get() => await context.Users.Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations).ThenInclude(x => x.Server)
- .ThenInclude(x => x.Channels).FirstAsync(user => user.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+private async Task<User> Get(bool includeServers = false)
+{
+ var query = context.Users.AsQueryable();
+
+ if (includeServers)
+ {
+ query = query.Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations)
+ .ThenInclude(x => x.Server)
+ .ThenInclude(x => x.Channels);
+ }
+
+ return await query.FirstAsync(user => user.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+}The previous review comment about error handling is still valid.
11-24:
Add input validation and uniqueness checks.
The method needs additional validation:
- Required field validation
- Email format validation
- Username/Email uniqueness check
Apply this diff:
public async Task<UserDto> CreateUser(UserCredentialsInput input)
{
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Email) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Username))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Email and Username are required");
+
+ if (!input.Email.Contains("@"))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Invalid email format");
+
+ var exists = await context.Users.AnyAsync(u =>
+ u.Email == input.Email ||
+ u.Username == input.Username);
+ if (exists)
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("Email or Username already exists");
+
var user = new User
{
Email = input.Email,The previous review comment about password validation is still valid.
27-37:
Add validation and handle concurrency.
Issues to address:
- Email format validation when updating
- Potential race condition between Get and Update
Apply this diff:
public async Task<UserDto> UpdateUser(UserCredentialsInput input)
{
var user = await Get();
+
+ if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(input.Email) && !input.Email.Contains("@"))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Invalid email format");
+
+ var exists = await context.Users.AnyAsync(u =>
+ u.Id != this.GetPrimaryKey() &&
+ (u.Email == input.Email || u.Username == input.Username));
+ if (exists)
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("Email or Username already exists");
+
user.Email = input.Email;
user.Username = input.Username ?? user.Username;
user.PhoneNumber = input.PhoneNumber ?? user.PhoneNumber;
- user.PasswordDigest = passwordHashingService.HashPassword(input.Password, input.PasswordConfirmation) ?? user.PasswordDigest;
+ context.Entry(user).State = EntityState.Modified;
try {
await context.SaveChangesAsync();
+ } catch (DbUpdateConcurrencyException) {
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("User was modified by another process");
}
return user;
}The previous review comment about null password handling is still valid.
40-45: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add validation for already deleted users.
The method should check if the user is already deleted before updating.
Apply this diff:
public Task DeleteUser()
{
var user = context.Users.First(u => u.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+ if (user.DeletedAt.HasValue)
+ throw new InvalidOperationException("User is already deleted");
+
user.DeletedAt = DateTime.UtcNow;
context.Users.Update(user);
return context.SaveChangesAsync();
}The previous review comment about using async methods is still valid.
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ChannelManager.cs (6)
9-13: LGTM! Well-structured class declaration with proper DI.
The class is properly structured with clear dependency injection and correct Orleans persistent state configuration.
17-17: Replace non-English exception message.
This is a duplicate of a previous review comment that hasn't been addressed. The exception message should be in English and more descriptive.
30-33: Add validation in Leave method.
This is a duplicate of a previous review comment that hasn't been addressed. The method should validate if the user exists before attempting removal.
36-41: LGTM! Clean implementation of GetChannel.
The method properly combines channel data with connected users.
43-52: Optimize UpdateChannel method.
This is a duplicate of a previous review comment that hasn't been addressed. The method needs null checks and optimization of database operations.
55-55: Add proper error handling in Get method.
This is a duplicate of a previous review comment that hasn't been addressed. The method should use FirstOrDefaultAsync with proper error message.
src/AppHost/Program.cs (1)
20-25: Clickhouse configuration looks good, but verify port exposure necessity.
The Clickhouse configuration is well-structured with proper volume mounts and environment variables. However:
- Verify if both HTTP (8123) and native (9000) endpoints need to be exposed externally
- Consider adding resource limits (CPU/memory) for the Clickhouse container
✅ Verification successful
Let me check the docker-compose.yaml file to understand how these ports are being used.
Let me check if there are any client applications or services that need to connect to Clickhouse using these ports.
Let me check if there are any database connection strings or client configurations that might be using these ports.
Let me check for any Clickhouse client libraries or dependencies that might indicate how the application interacts with Clickhouse.
Based on all the gathered information, I can now provide the final response:
Both HTTP (8123) and native (9000) ports should be exposed for Clickhouse
The port exposure is necessary because:
- Port 8123 is required for HTTP interface which is commonly used for monitoring, administration, and REST API access
- Port 9000 is needed for native client protocol, which is used for high-performance data operations
- The docker-compose.yaml confirms these ports are properly configured for external access
- While no direct client usage is found in the current codebase, these ports are standard Clickhouse endpoints that should remain accessible for future integration and administration
Regarding resource limits: Yes, consider adding them as there are currently no CPU/memory constraints defined in the docker-compose.yaml.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if these ports are required by other services
rg -l "8123|9000" --type yaml --type json
Length of output: 63
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the docker-compose.yaml content to understand port usage
cat docker-compose.yaml
Length of output: 1592
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for Clickhouse client connections in the codebase
rg -l "clickhouse" --type=cs --type=json --type=yaml
# Search specifically for port numbers in C# files
rg "8123|9000" --type=cs -C 2
Length of output: 781
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for database connection configurations
rg -C 3 "ClickHouseConnection|clickhouse.*connect" --type=cs
# Look for any appsettings files that might contain connection strings
fd appsettings -e json -x cat {}
Length of output: 1700
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for Clickhouse client dependencies in project files
fd . -e csproj -x cat {}
# Look for any Clickhouse-related imports or usings
rg "using.*Clickhouse" --type=cs
Length of output: 6261
src/Argon.Api/Grains/ServerManager.cs (1)
7-7: Consider separating data access concerns from grain logic.
Direct database access within grains can lead to performance issues and violate Orleans' single-threaded execution model. Consider implementing a repository pattern to separate data access from grain logic.
src/Argon.Contracts/IUserInteraction.cs (1)
58-58: Verify the impact of enriched channel data.
The change from List<Guid> to List<ServerDetailsResponse> for the Channels property is a good improvement that provides richer channel information. However, we should verify that:
- The server-side implementation efficiently loads this data
- All consumers handle the expanded data structure correctly
✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more information about the implementation to verify the server-side efficiency.
Based on the gathered information, I can now provide a final response:
The enriched channel data change is properly implemented and efficient
The server-side implementation shows good practices:
- Uses efficient eager loading through EF Core's
Include()inUserManager.Get():Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations).ThenInclude(x => x.Server).ThenInclude(x => x.Channels) - The mapping is handled through a simple projection using
Select(x => (ServerDetailsResponse)x) - The data model is properly serializable with appropriate attributes (DataContract, MemoryPackable)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for usages of ServerResponse to verify consumers handle the new Channels type
rg -l "ServerResponse" | xargs rg "Channels" -B 2 -A 2
Length of output: 984
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the implementation of GetServerChannels and related methods
ast-grep --pattern 'GetServerChannels'
Length of output: 38
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Look for ServerDetailsResponse implementation and mapping
rg "ServerDetailsResponse" -B 3 -A 3
Length of output: 2644
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any performance-related attributes or batch loading hints
rg "Include|Join|Select.*Channels" -A 2
Length of output: 14775
src/Argon.Api/Grains/SessionManager.cs (2)
34-37: Verify the necessity of generating an OTP after password verification
After successful password verification, an OTP is generated and stored but not sent to the user. This might lead to confusion or unused data stored in the database.
Please confirm if generating the OTP here is intentional. If the OTP is needed, consider sending it to the user. If not, you might want to remove this step.
8-14:
Fix the incorrect class constructor syntax
The SessionManager class is using an invalid constructor syntax. In C#, constructors should be defined inside the class body, not directly after the class name. You need to define the constructor separately and assign the injected dependencies to private fields.
Apply this diff to correct the class definition:
-public class SessionManager(
- IGrainFactory grainFactory,
- ILogger<UserManager> logger,
- UserManagerService managerService,
- IPasswordHashingService passwordHashingService,
- ApplicationDbContext context) : Grain, ISessionManager
-{
+public class SessionManager : Grain, ISessionManager
+{
+ private readonly IGrainFactory grainFactory;
+ private readonly ILogger<UserManager> logger;
+ private readonly UserManagerService managerService;
+ private readonly IPasswordHashingService passwordHashingService;
+ private readonly ApplicationDbContext context;
+
+ public SessionManager(
+ IGrainFactory grainFactory,
+ ILogger<UserManager> logger,
+ UserManagerService managerService,
+ IPasswordHashingService passwordHashingService,
+ ApplicationDbContext context)
+ {
+ this.grainFactory = grainFactory;
+ this.logger = logger;
+ this.managerService = managerService;
+ this.passwordHashingService = passwordHashingService;
+ this.context = context;
+ }Likely invalid or redundant comment.
| public interface IEmailManager : IGrainWithGuidKey | ||
| { | ||
| Task SendEmailAsync(string email, string subject, string message, string template = "none"); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve interface design with validation and documentation.
The interface could benefit from several improvements:
- Add input validation for email format
- Define error cases and exceptions
- Use enum for template types instead of string
- Add XML documentation
Consider applying these changes:
+ /// <summary>
+ /// Manages email operations in the distributed application.
+ /// </summary>
public interface IEmailManager : IGrainWithGuidKey
{
+ /// <summary>
+ /// Sends an email asynchronously.
+ /// </summary>
+ /// <param name="email">Recipient's email address</param>
+ /// <param name="subject">Email subject</param>
+ /// <param name="message">Email content</param>
+ /// <param name="template">Email template to use</param>
+ /// <returns>A task representing the asynchronous operation</returns>
+ /// <exception cref="ArgumentException">Thrown when email format is invalid</exception>
+ /// <exception cref="InvalidOperationException">Thrown when email sending fails</exception>
- Task SendEmailAsync(string email, string subject, string message, string template = "none");
+ Task SendEmailAsync(
+ [EmailAddress] string email,
+ string subject,
+ string message,
+ EmailTemplate template = EmailTemplate.None);
}
+ /// <summary>
+ /// Available email templates
+ /// </summary>
+ public enum EmailTemplate
+ {
+ /// <summary>
+ /// No template, plain email
+ /// </summary>
+ None,
+ // Add other template types as needed
+ }Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| public record SmtpConfig | ||
| { | ||
| public string Host { get; set; } | ||
| public int Port { get; set; } | ||
| public string User { get; set; } | ||
| public string Password { get; set; } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance security and add validation for SMTP configuration.
Several improvements can be made to this configuration record:
- Use SecureString for password to prevent memory exposure
- Make properties immutable to prevent runtime modifications
- Add validation attributes for required fields and port range
- Add XML documentation for public API
Consider applying these changes:
+ using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations;
+ using System.Security;
+ /// <summary>
+ /// Configuration for SMTP email server connection.
+ /// </summary>
public record SmtpConfig
{
- public string Host { get; set; }
- public int Port { get; set; }
- public string User { get; set; }
- public string Password { get; set; }
+ /// <summary>
+ /// SMTP server hostname
+ /// </summary>
+ [Required]
+ public string Host { get; init; }
+
+ /// <summary>
+ /// SMTP server port
+ /// </summary>
+ [Range(1, 65535)]
+ public int Port { get; init; }
+
+ /// <summary>
+ /// SMTP authentication username
+ /// </summary>
+ [Required]
+ public string User { get; init; }
+
+ /// <summary>
+ /// SMTP authentication password
+ /// </summary>
+ [Required]
+ public SecureString Password { get; init; }
}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| public record SmtpConfig | |
| { | |
| public string Host { get; set; } | |
| public int Port { get; set; } | |
| public string User { get; set; } | |
| public string Password { get; set; } | |
| } | |
| using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations; | |
| using System.Security; | |
| /// <summary> | |
| /// Configuration for SMTP email server connection. | |
| /// </summary> | |
| public record SmtpConfig | |
| { | |
| /// <summary> | |
| /// SMTP server hostname | |
| /// </summary> | |
| [Required] | |
| public string Host { get; init; } | |
| /// <summary> | |
| /// SMTP server port | |
| /// </summary> | |
| [Range(1, 65535)] | |
| public int Port { get; init; } | |
| /// <summary> | |
| /// SMTP authentication username | |
| /// </summary> | |
| [Required] | |
| public string User { get; init; } | |
| /// <summary> | |
| /// SMTP authentication password | |
| /// </summary> | |
| [Required] | |
| public SecureString Password { get; init; } | |
| } |
| using System.Runtime.Serialization; | ||
| using Entities; | ||
| using MemoryPack; | ||
| using MessagePack; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider standardizing on a single serialization framework.
The code imports multiple serialization frameworks (DataContract, MemoryPack, MessagePack). Using multiple serialization frameworks increases complexity and could lead to runtime issues.
Choose the most appropriate framework based on your performance requirements:
- DataContract: Good for WCF/.NET interop
- MemoryPack: High-performance binary serialization
- MessagePack: Compact binary format with good cross-platform support
| private SmtpClient Client => new() | ||
| { | ||
| Port = config.Value.Port, | ||
| Host = config.Value.Host, | ||
| EnableSsl = true, | ||
| DeliveryMethod = SmtpDeliveryMethod.Network, | ||
| UseDefaultCredentials = false, | ||
| Credentials = new NetworkCredential(config.Value.User, config.Value.Password) | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Critical: Improve SmtpClient handling and configuration.
Several issues need to be addressed:
- The
SmtpClientis recreated on every property access, which is inefficient SmtpClientimplementsIDisposablebut is not being disposed- SSL is hardcoded without configuration flexibility
- Missing validation of configuration values
Consider refactoring to this pattern:
- private SmtpClient Client => new()
- {
- Port = config.Value.Port,
- Host = config.Value.Host,
- EnableSsl = true,
- DeliveryMethod = SmtpDeliveryMethod.Network,
- UseDefaultCredentials = false,
- Credentials = new NetworkCredential(config.Value.User, config.Value.Password)
- };
+ private readonly SmtpClient _client;
+
+ public override Task OnActivateAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
+ {
+ var smtpConfig = config.Value;
+
+ // Validate configuration
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(smtpConfig.Host))
+ throw new ArgumentException("SMTP host cannot be empty", nameof(smtpConfig.Host));
+ if (smtpConfig.Port <= 0)
+ throw new ArgumentException("Invalid SMTP port", nameof(smtpConfig.Port));
+
+ _client = new SmtpClient
+ {
+ Port = smtpConfig.Port,
+ Host = smtpConfig.Host,
+ EnableSsl = smtpConfig.EnableSsl, // Add this to SmtpConfig
+ DeliveryMethod = SmtpDeliveryMethod.Network,
+ UseDefaultCredentials = false,
+ Credentials = new NetworkCredential(smtpConfig.User, smtpConfig.Password)
+ };
+
+ return base.OnActivateAsync(cancellationToken);
+ }
+
+ public override Task OnDeactivateAsync(DeactivationReason reason, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
+ {
+ _client?.Dispose();
+ return base.OnDeactivateAsync(reason, cancellationToken);
+ }Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| public Task SendEmailAsync(string email, string subject, string message, string template = "none") | ||
| { | ||
| #if DEBUG | ||
| logger.LogCritical($"Email sent to {email} with subject {subject} and message {message}"); | ||
| return Task.CompletedTask; | ||
| #else | ||
| var mail = new MailMessage(config.Value.User, email, subject, message) | ||
| { | ||
| IsBodyHtml = true | ||
| }; | ||
| return Client.SendMailAsync(mail); | ||
| #endif | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Input validation and error handling improvements needed, template parameter can be removed
The review comment's suggestions about input validation and error handling are valid, but the template parameter is unused and appears to be a remnant of an unimplemented feature. Since there are no template files or template-related code in the codebase besides this unused parameter, we should:
- Remove the unused
templateparameter from bothIEmailManagerinterface andEmailManagerimplementation - Implement the suggested input validation and error handling improvements
- Use structured logging as suggested in the review
The specific diff provided in the review comment is appropriate with these modifications:
- Remove the
templateparameter - Keep all other suggested improvements including email validation, error handling, and logging enhancements
🔗 Analysis chain
Add proper error handling and input validation.
The email sending implementation needs several improvements:
- Missing error handling for SMTP operations
- No email address validation
- No content sanitization for HTML messages
- Unused template parameter suggests incomplete feature
Consider this improved implementation:
- public Task SendEmailAsync(string email, string subject, string message, string template = "none")
+ public async Task SendEmailAsync(string email, string subject, string message, string template = "none")
{
+ if (!IsValidEmail(email))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Invalid email address", nameof(email));
+
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(subject))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Subject cannot be empty", nameof(subject));
+
+ if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(message))
+ throw new ArgumentException("Message cannot be empty", nameof(message));
+
#if DEBUG
- logger.LogCritical($"Email sent to {email} with subject {subject} and message {message}");
- return Task.CompletedTask;
+ logger.LogInformation("Debug mode: Would send email to {Email} with subject {Subject}", email, subject);
+ return;
#else
- var mail = new MailMessage(config.Value.User, email, subject, message)
- {
- IsBodyHtml = true
- };
- return Client.SendMailAsync(mail);
+ try
+ {
+ var sanitizedMessage = HtmlSanitizer.Sanitize(message); // Add HtmlSanitizer package
+
+ using var mail = new MailMessage(config.Value.User, email, subject, sanitizedMessage)
+ {
+ IsBodyHtml = true
+ };
+
+ await _client.SendMailAsync(mail);
+ logger.LogInformation("Email sent successfully to {Email}", email);
+ }
+ catch (SmtpException ex)
+ {
+ logger.LogError(ex, "Failed to send email to {Email}", email);
+ throw new EmailSendException("Failed to send email", ex);
+ }
#endif
}
+
+ private static bool IsValidEmail(string email)
+ {
+ try
+ {
+ var addr = new System.Net.Mail.MailAddress(email);
+ return addr.Address == email;
+ }
+ catch
+ {
+ return false;
+ }
+ }🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check if template feature is implemented elsewhere
rg -l "template.*=.*\"none\"" --type cs
Length of output: 125
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check the interface and implementation for template usage
rg -A 10 -B 10 'template.*=.*"none"' src/Argon.Api/Grains.Interfaces/IEmailManager.cs src/Argon.Api/Grains/EmailManager.cs
# Look for any template-related code
rg -i "template" --type cs
# Check for any email template files
fd -e html -e cshtml -e template
Length of output: 3014
| private async Task<Server> Get() => await context.Servers.Include(x => x.Channels).Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations) | ||
| .FirstAsync(s => s.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve error handling and query optimization.
Add proper error handling for missing servers and consider using projection for better performance.
-private async Task<Server> Get() => await context.Servers.Include(x => x.Channels).Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations)
- .FirstAsync(s => s.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+private async Task<Server> Get()
+{
+ var server = await context.Servers
+ .Include(x => x.Channels)
+ .Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations)
+ .FirstOrDefaultAsync(s => s.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey());
+
+ if (server == null)
+ throw new KeyNotFoundException($"Server {this.GetPrimaryKey()} not found");
+
+ return server;
+}📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| private async Task<Server> Get() => await context.Servers.Include(x => x.Channels).Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations) | |
| .FirstAsync(s => s.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey()); | |
| private async Task<Server> Get() | |
| { | |
| var server = await context.Servers | |
| .Include(x => x.Channels) | |
| .Include(x => x.UsersToServerRelations) | |
| .FirstOrDefaultAsync(s => s.Id == this.GetPrimaryKey()); | |
| if (server == null) | |
| throw new KeyNotFoundException($"Server {this.GetPrimaryKey()} not found"); | |
| return server; | |
| } |
| CustomUsername = user.Username ?? user.Email, | ||
| AvatarUrl = user.AvatarUrl, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add null check for user.Username and user.AvatarUrl.
The code assumes these properties exist but they could be null. Consider adding proper null checks and default values.
- CustomUsername = user.Username ?? user.Email,
- AvatarUrl = user.AvatarUrl,
+ CustomUsername = string.IsNullOrEmpty(user.Username) ? user.Email : user.Username,
+ AvatarUrl = string.IsNullOrEmpty(user.AvatarUrl) ? null : user.AvatarUrl,📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| CustomUsername = user.Username ?? user.Email, | |
| AvatarUrl = user.AvatarUrl, | |
| CustomUsername = string.IsNullOrEmpty(user.Username) ? user.Email : user.Username, | |
| AvatarUrl = string.IsNullOrEmpty(user.AvatarUrl) ? null : user.AvatarUrl, |
| public async Task<ServerDto> UpdateServer(ServerInput input) | ||
| { | ||
| await serverStore.ReadStateAsync(); | ||
| return serverStore.State; | ||
| var server = await Get(); | ||
| server.Name = input.Name; | ||
| server.Description = input.Description; | ||
| server.AvatarUrl = input.AvatarUrl; | ||
| context.Servers.Update(server); | ||
| await context.SaveChangesAsync(); | ||
| return await Get(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add permission check for server updates.
The method should verify that the user has appropriate permissions to modify the server.
public async Task<ServerDto> UpdateServer(ServerInput input)
{
+ var currentUserId = RequestContext.Get("UserId") as Guid?;
+ if (!currentUserId.HasValue)
+ throw new UnauthorizedAccessException("User not authenticated");
+
var server = await Get();
+ var userRole = server.UsersToServerRelations
+ .FirstOrDefault(r => r.UserId == currentUserId)?.Role;
+ if (userRole != ServerRole.Owner && userRole != ServerRole.Admin)
+ throw new UnauthorizedAccessException("Insufficient permissions");
+
server.Name = input.Name;
server.Description = input.Description;
server.AvatarUrl = input.AvatarUrl;Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
| [property: DataMember(Order = 3), MemoryPackOrder(3), Key(3)] | ||
| string CreatedBy, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 4)] | ||
| [property: MemoryPackOrder(4)] | ||
| [property: Key(4)] | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 4), MemoryPackOrder(4), Key(4)] | ||
| string ChannelType, | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 5)] | ||
| [property: MemoryPackOrder(5)] | ||
| [property: Key(5)] | ||
| [property: DataMember(Order = 5), MemoryPackOrder(5), Key(5)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Enhance type safety for channel properties.
Consider using enums instead of strings for ChannelType and AccessLevel to ensure type safety and prevent invalid values:
- string ChannelType,
- string AccessLevel,
+ ChannelType ChannelType,
+ AccessLevel AccessLevel,Add these enums:
public enum ChannelType
{
Text,
Voice,
// Add other types as needed
}
public enum AccessLevel
{
Public,
Private,
// Add other levels as needed
}| user.OTP = passwordHashingService.GenerateOtp(); | ||
| await grainFactory.GetGrain<IEmailManager>(Guid.NewGuid()).SendEmailAsync(user.Email, "OTP", $"Your OTP is {user.OTP}"); | ||
| context.Users.Update(user); | ||
| await context.SaveChangesAsync(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Add exception handling for email sending failures
Exceptions thrown during the email-sending process can cause the entire authentication flow to fail. It's important to handle potential exceptions to ensure the application remains robust.
Wrap the email-sending code in a try-catch block:
try
{
await grainFactory.GetGrain<IEmailManager>(Guid.NewGuid())
.SendEmailAsync(user.Email, "OTP", $"Your OTP is {user.OTP}");
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
logger.LogError(ex, "Failed to send OTP email to {Email}", user.Email);
// Optionally, inform the user or retry sending the email
}Securely store OTPs to prevent security vulnerabilities
Storing OTPs in plaintext in the database can pose significant security risks if the database is compromised. It's recommended to hash the OTP before storing it to enhance security.
Consider modifying the code to hash the OTP:
user.OTP = passwordHashingService.GenerateOtp();
+user.OTP = passwordHashingService.HashOtp(user.OTP);Ensure that the OTP verification process is updated accordingly to compare the hashed values.
Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
docker-compose.yamlfile for multi-service architecture including services for cache, RabbitMQ, PostgreSQL, and ClickHouse.ChannelsControllerfor managing channel operations with endpoints for joining, leaving, retrieving, and updating channels.ServersControllerfor server management with endpoints for creating, retrieving, updating, and deleting servers.InjectIdAttributefor automatic user ID injection into action methods.UserManagerServicefor enhanced user management functionalities including user creation and validation.SessionManagerfor user authentication and session management, providing JWT generation and user retrieval.IEmailManagerinterface andEmailManagerclass for sending emails via SMTP.Bug Fixes
Documentation
Refactor
JwtOptions,UserAuthorization, andUserManagerclasses.Chores
Tests
ChannelsControllerandServersControllerto ensure functionality and reliability.