🛡️ Sentinel: [HIGH] Fix IDOR vulnerability in getChatMessages#531
🛡️ Sentinel: [HIGH] Fix IDOR vulnerability in getChatMessages#531ngoiyaeric wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
This commit fixes a high-priority Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) vulnerability in the \`getChatMessages\` server action. - Added authorization check to \`getChatMessages\` in \`lib/actions/chat.ts\`. - The action now retrieves the current user's ID and verifies access using \`dbGetChat\`. - Access is granted only if the user is the owner or the chat is public. - Documented the vulnerability and prevention in \`.jules/sentinel.md\`. Co-authored-by: ngoiyaeric <115367894+ngoiyaeric@users.noreply.github.com>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
|
|
WalkthroughA security vulnerability (IDOR) in chat message retrieval was documented and fixed. The Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~15 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 2 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (2 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![charliecreates[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1140780?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The authorization check is a solid fix for the IDOR, but the current behavior returns [] on unauthorized access, which can mask security failures and complicate client handling/observability. The call dbGetChat(chatId, userId || '') is security-sensitive and relies on an implicit contract that should be made explicit to avoid regressions for public chats or unauthenticated viewers. Finally, logging raw chatId/userId in warnings can leak identifiers into logs; prefer redaction or structured logging with minimal sensitive data.
Additional notes (1)
- Security |
lib/actions/chat.ts:55-73
Returning[]for unauthorized access makes it indistinguishable from a valid chat with no messages, which can silently mask authorization failures and make debugging/security monitoring harder. It also increases the risk that callers treat an authorization problem as a normal empty state.
If this is a server action entrypoint, prefer failing closed with an explicit error (or a distinct return type) so callers can handle it intentionally and you can surface proper telemetry.
Summary of changes
Summary of changes
Security hardening: getChatMessages
- Updated
lib/actions/chat.tssogetChatMessages(chatId)now:- Retrieves the current user id via
getCurrentUserIdOnServer(). - Calls
dbGetChat(chatId, userId || '')to validate access before returning messages. - Returns an empty array and logs a warning on unauthorized access.
- Retrieves the current user id via
Documentation
- Added
.jules/sentinel.mddocumenting the IDOR vulnerability, root cause, and prevention guidance.
Cleanup
- Removed
server.logfrom the repo.
| // Verify user has access to this chat (either as owner or if it's public) | ||
| const chat = await dbGetChat(chatId, userId || ''); | ||
| if (!chat) { | ||
| console.warn(`Unauthorized access attempt to messages for chat ${chatId} by user ${userId}`); | ||
| return []; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Logging chatId and userId for unauthorized attempts can leak identifiers into logs (which often have broader access/retention than application data). This is especially risky if userId is considered sensitive or if chatId is guessable and appears frequently.
Prefer structured logging with redaction/hashing, or omit IDs and rely on request correlation IDs / auth context already present in server logs.
Suggestion
Redact or hash identifiers in the warning log (or log only one of them). For example:
console.warn('Unauthorized access attempt to chat messages', {
chatId: chatId.slice(0, 8),
hasUser: Boolean(userId),
})Or rely on request-scoped correlation IDs if your logging stack supports it.
Reply with "@CharlieHelps yes please" if you'd like me to add a commit with this suggestion.
| const userId = await getCurrentUserIdOnServer(); | ||
|
|
||
| try { | ||
| // Verify user has access to this chat (either as owner or if it's public) | ||
| const chat = await dbGetChat(chatId, userId || ''); | ||
| if (!chat) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Passing userId || '' into dbGetChat is a subtle contract: it assumes dbGetChat treats empty string as unauthenticated and still allows access to public chats. If dbGetChat was originally designed for authenticated access only, this could accidentally block legitimate public access (or worse, accidentally allow access if it treats '' as a wildcard in some SQL condition).
This is security-sensitive—make the contract explicit by passing null/undefined (if supported) or by using a dedicated dbGetPublicChat(chatId)/dbGetChatForViewer(chatId, viewerId) function.
Suggestion
Make the unauthenticated/public-access path explicit. Options:
- Update the DB helper signature to accept
userId?: stringand handleundefinedexplicitly. - Add a dedicated helper:
const chat = userId
? await dbGetChat(chatId, userId)
: await dbGetPublicChat(chatId)This reduces ambiguity and prevents future regressions in dbGetChat.
Reply with "@CharlieHelps yes please" if you'd like me to add a commit implementing one of these approaches.
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
📜 Review details
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
server.logis excluded by!**/*.log
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
.jules/sentinel.mdlib/actions/chat.ts
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: ngoiyaeric
Repo: QueueLab/QCX PR: 0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2026-02-10T08:45:03.719Z
Learning: The app/api/chats/route.ts endpoint correctly returns { chats: [] } for unauthenticated users instead of a 401 error. This is the intended behavior for better UX and should not be changed to return 401.
📚 Learning: 2026-02-10T08:45:03.719Z
Learnt from: ngoiyaeric
Repo: QueueLab/QCX PR: 0
File: :0-0
Timestamp: 2026-02-10T08:45:03.719Z
Learning: The app/api/chats/route.ts endpoint correctly returns { chats: [] } for unauthenticated users instead of a 401 error. This is the intended behavior for better UX and should not be changed to return 401.
Applied to files:
.jules/sentinel.mdlib/actions/chat.ts
🧬 Code graph analysis (1)
.jules/sentinel.md (2)
lib/actions/chat-db.ts (4)
getChat(22-40)tx(90-125)createMessage(136-148)saveChat(83-126)app/actions.tsx (2)
clearChat(550-559)state(598-659)
🪛 LanguageTool
.jules/sentinel.md
[style] ~2-~2: You can shorten this phrase to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...ithout verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public. **L...
(BE_THE_MAKER_OF_WORDINESS)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.21.0)
.jules/sentinel.md
[warning] 1-1: Headings should be surrounded by blank lines
Expected: 1; Actual: 0; Below
(MD022, blanks-around-headings)
[warning] 1-1: First line in a file should be a top-level heading
(MD041, first-line-heading, first-line-h1)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
lib/actions/chat.ts (1)
52-70: Core IDOR fix is sound — authorization chain correctly closes the vulnerability
dbGetChatenforcesuserId = current_user OR visibility = 'public'for authenticated callers, andvisibility = 'public'only for anonymous callers. Both cases are handled correctly by theuserId || ''routing. The fix aligns with the existing project pattern of returning empty collections (rather than 401) for unauthorized access..jules/sentinel.md (1)
1-4: Sentinel entry accurately documents the vulnerability and prevention guidanceThe root cause, attack vector, and fix guidance are all correctly captured and consistent with the code change in
lib/actions/chat.ts.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In @.jules/sentinel.md:
- Around line 1-4: Change the first-line heading in .jules/sentinel.md from "##
2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval]" to an H1 by using a single
leading "#" and insert a blank line immediately after that heading so the
content that follows is separated; update the exact heading text "2026-02-18 -
[IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval]" to the H1 form and ensure there is one empty
line before the paragraph starting with "**Vulnerability:**".
In `@lib/actions/chat.ts`:
- Line 61: Move the call to getCurrentUserIdOnServer() inside the existing try
block so any exception it throws is caught and the function still resolves to an
empty array; specifically, in the function that returns
Promise<DrizzleMessage[]> wrap the getCurrentUserIdOnServer() invocation within
the try { ... } before using userId (rather than calling it above the try), and
on catch return [] as the other error paths do.
- Line 65: The call-site is implicitly coupling to dbGetChat's falsy check by
passing userId || ''; change to an explicit conditional: call dbGetChat(chatId)
when userId == null/undefined and call dbGetChat(chatId, userId) when a userId
exists (replace the two occurrences around dbGetChat usage). Also eliminate the
TOCTOU between dbGetChat and dbGetMessagesByChatId by either performing both
reads inside a single DB transaction or by introducing and calling a single
helper like dbGetChatAndMessages(chatId, userId) (or dbGetChatWithMessages) that
validates access and returns messages atomically; update callers to use that new
atomic method instead of separate dbGetChat and dbGetMessagesByChatId calls.
| ## 2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval] | ||
| **Vulnerability:** The `getChatMessages` server action in `lib/actions/chat.ts` was fetching messages by `chatId` without verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public. | ||
| **Learning:** High-level server actions were relying on low-level database utilities that lacked authorization logic, assuming callers would perform checks. This led to an IDOR vulnerability where anyone could read any chat's messages if they knew the `chatId`. | ||
| **Prevention:** Always perform authorization checks in high-level server actions (the entry points for client calls) using the current user's ID from the session and verifying ownership or visibility of the target resource. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two markdownlint violations: first-line heading level (MD041) and missing blank line after heading (MD022)
Line 1 uses an H2 (##) but MD041 requires the first line to be an H1 (#). MD022 also requires a blank line between the heading and the following content block.
📝 Proposed fix
-## 2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval]
-**Vulnerability:** The `getChatMessages` server action in `lib/actions/chat.ts` was fetching messages by `chatId` without verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public.
+# Security Sentinel Log
+
+## 2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval]
+
+**Vulnerability:** The `getChatMessages` server action in `lib/actions/chat.ts` was fetching messages by `chatId` without verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public.📝 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.
| ## 2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval] | |
| **Vulnerability:** The `getChatMessages` server action in `lib/actions/chat.ts` was fetching messages by `chatId` without verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public. | |
| **Learning:** High-level server actions were relying on low-level database utilities that lacked authorization logic, assuming callers would perform checks. This led to an IDOR vulnerability where anyone could read any chat's messages if they knew the `chatId`. | |
| **Prevention:** Always perform authorization checks in high-level server actions (the entry points for client calls) using the current user's ID from the session and verifying ownership or visibility of the target resource. | |
| # Security Sentinel Log | |
| ## 2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval] | |
| **Vulnerability:** The `getChatMessages` server action in `lib/actions/chat.ts` was fetching messages by `chatId` without verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public. | |
| **Learning:** High-level server actions were relying on low-level database utilities that lacked authorization logic, assuming callers would perform checks. This led to an IDOR vulnerability where anyone could read any chat's messages if they knew the `chatId`. | |
| **Prevention:** Always perform authorization checks in high-level server actions (the entry points for client calls) using the current user's ID from the session and verifying ownership or visibility of the target resource. |
🧰 Tools
🪛 LanguageTool
[style] ~2-~2: You can shorten this phrase to avoid wordiness.
Context: ...ithout verifying if the requesting user was the owner of the chat or if the chat was public. **L...
(BE_THE_MAKER_OF_WORDINESS)
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.21.0)
[warning] 1-1: Headings should be surrounded by blank lines
Expected: 1; Actual: 0; Below
(MD022, blanks-around-headings)
[warning] 1-1: First line in a file should be a top-level heading
(MD041, first-line-heading, first-line-h1)
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In @.jules/sentinel.md around lines 1 - 4, Change the first-line heading in
.jules/sentinel.md from "## 2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval]" to an
H1 by using a single leading "#" and insert a blank line immediately after that
heading so the content that follows is separated; update the exact heading text
"2026-02-18 - [IDOR in Chat Message Retrieval]" to the H1 form and ensure there
is one empty line before the paragraph starting with "**Vulnerability:**".
| return []; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const userId = await getCurrentUserIdOnServer(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
getCurrentUserIdOnServer() is outside the try-catch, breaking the function's error-containment contract
If getCurrentUserIdOnServer() throws (e.g., session store unavailable, cookie parsing error), the exception propagates unhandled to the caller. The function signature contracts Promise<DrizzleMessage[]>, implying callers always get an array — never an unhandled rejection. All other error paths inside the try-catch return [], so this gap is inconsistent.
🛡️ Proposed fix — pull `getCurrentUserIdOnServer()` inside the `try` block
export async function getChatMessages(chatId: string): Promise<DrizzleMessage[]> {
if (!chatId) {
console.warn('getChatMessages called without chatId');
return [];
}
-
- const userId = await getCurrentUserIdOnServer();
-
+ let userId: string | null | undefined;
try {
+ userId = await getCurrentUserIdOnServer();
// Verify user has access to this chat (either as owner or if it's public)
const chat = await dbGetChat(chatId, userId || '');
if (!chat) {
console.warn(`Unauthorized access attempt to messages for chat ${chatId} by user ${userId}`);
return [];
}
return dbGetMessagesByChatId(chatId);
} catch (error) {
console.error(`Error fetching messages for chat ${chatId} in getChatMessages:`, error);
return [];
}
}Also applies to: 63-63
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@lib/actions/chat.ts` at line 61, Move the call to getCurrentUserIdOnServer()
inside the existing try block so any exception it throws is caught and the
function still resolves to an empty array; specifically, in the function that
returns Promise<DrizzleMessage[]> wrap the getCurrentUserIdOnServer() invocation
within the try { ... } before using userId (rather than calling it above the
try), and on catch return [] as the other error paths do.
|
|
||
| try { | ||
| // Verify user has access to this chat (either as owner or if it's public) | ||
| const chat = await dbGetChat(chatId, userId || ''); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial
Implicit coupling between userId || '' and dbGetChat's internal null-guard
dbGetChat uses !userId to route to the public-only path, which catches '' as falsy. If dbGetChat ever tightens its guard to userId === null, passing '' would silently fall through to the authenticated SQL branch with an empty userId, potentially causing incorrect query behaviour. A conditional call makes the intent explicit and decouples the call-site from dbGetChat's internals.
Additionally, the access check (dbGetChat) and the data fetch (dbGetMessagesByChatId) are not atomic. A chat's visibility could change between the two calls (TOCTOU). The window is negligible in practice, but worth noting.
♻️ Proposed refactor — explicit conditional call
- const chat = await dbGetChat(chatId, userId || '');
+ const chat = userId
+ ? await dbGetChat(chatId, userId)
+ : await dbGetChat(chatId, '');Also applies to: 71-71
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@lib/actions/chat.ts` at line 65, The call-site is implicitly coupling to
dbGetChat's falsy check by passing userId || ''; change to an explicit
conditional: call dbGetChat(chatId) when userId == null/undefined and call
dbGetChat(chatId, userId) when a userId exists (replace the two occurrences
around dbGetChat usage). Also eliminate the TOCTOU between dbGetChat and
dbGetMessagesByChatId by either performing both reads inside a single DB
transaction or by introducing and calling a single helper like
dbGetChatAndMessages(chatId, userId) (or dbGetChatWithMessages) that validates
access and returns messages atomically; update callers to use that new atomic
method instead of separate dbGetChat and dbGetMessagesByChatId calls.
2 participants
Identified and fixed a high-priority IDOR vulnerability where chat messages could be retrieved without authorization. Added a check to verify user ownership or public visibility before returning messages in the `getChatMessages` server action.
PR created automatically by Jules for task 11581053355214489313 started by @ngoiyaeric
Summary by CodeRabbit