Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[PM-17915] feat: disable archived google users #715

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hendrikheil
Copy link

@hendrikheil hendrikheil commented Jan 22, 2025

🎟️ Tracking

https://bitwarden.atlassian.net/browse/PM-17453

📔 Objective

This PR changes the way Google Workspace users are marked as disabled. Google Workspace provides a way to archive users, which maintains their accounts and data but also disabled access.

Suspended users are charged as regular licenses by Google, where as archived users are billed at a reduced rate, which is ideal for employees leaving a company.

📸 Screenshots

⏰ Reminders before review

  • Contributor guidelines followed
  • All formatters and local linters executed and passed
  • Written new unit and / or integration tests where applicable
  • Used internationalization (i18n) for all UI strings
  • CI builds passed
  • Communicated to DevOps any deployment requirements
  • Updated any necessary documentation (Confluence, contributing docs) or informed the documentation team

🦮 Reviewer guidelines

  • 👍 (:+1:) or similar for great changes
  • 📝 (:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info
  • ❓ (:question:) for questions
  • 🤔 (:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion
  • 🎨 (:art:) for suggestions / improvements
  • ❌ (:x:) or ⚠️ (:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention
  • 🌱 (:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt
  • ⛏ (:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes

@hendrikheil hendrikheil requested a review from a team as a code owner January 22, 2025 18:23
@hendrikheil hendrikheil requested a review from eliykat January 22, 2025 18:23
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Jan 22, 2025

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@eliykat
Copy link
Member

eliykat commented Jan 23, 2025

Thanks @hendrikheil! I've created an internal ticket for us to track this. This seems reasonable to me but I'm double checking with our integrations team.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 24, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 2.23%. Comparing base (cf54858) to head (cb099f9).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/services/gsuite-directory.service.ts 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #715   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   2.23%   2.23%           
=====================================
  Files         60      60           
  Lines       2634    2634           
  Branches     467     467           
=====================================
  Hits          59      59           
  Misses      2572    2572           
  Partials       3       3           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

Logo
Checkmarx One – Scan Summary & Details79ba76aa-4aaa-4a07-86d4-936b5b509b7e

Great job, no security vulnerabilities found in this Pull Request

Copy link
Member

@eliykat eliykat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, passing to QA to do some manual testing on before merging.

@eliykat eliykat added needs-qa hold do not merge, do not approve yet labels Jan 24, 2025
@hendrikheil
Copy link
Author

LGTM, passing to QA to do some manual testing on before merging.

Sounds good 👍 .

Heads up for anyone finding this through a search engine in the future. It's important to remove isArchived=false from your Google Workspace query, if you have ever set it as a query filter before. With this PR those users are now moved to disabledUsers instead of just being outright removed. That allows you to properly handle users that have previously been enabled and you've archived later on.

@bitwarden-bot
Copy link

Thank you for your contribution! We've added this to our internal Community PR board for review.
ID: PM-17915

@bitwarden-bot bitwarden-bot changed the title feat: disable archived google users [PM-17915] feat: disable archived google users Feb 3, 2025
@bitwarden-bot bitwarden-bot added community-pr and removed hold do not merge, do not approve yet needs-qa labels Feb 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants