mirror of
https://github.com/juanfont/headscale.git
synced 2026-04-23 00:58:43 +02:00
Previously, nodes with empty filter rules (e.g., tagged servers that are only destinations, never sources) were skipped entirely in BuildPeerMap. This could cause visibility issues when using autogroup:self with multiple user groups. Remove the len(filter) == 0 skip condition so all nodes are included in nodeMatchers. Empty filters result in empty matchers where CanAccess() returns false, but the node still needs to be in the map so symmetric visibility works correctly: if node A can access node B, both should see each other regardless of B's filter rules. Add comprehensive tests for: - Multi-group scenarios where autogroup:self is used by privileged users - Nodes with empty filters remaining visible to authorized peers - Combined access rules (autogroup:self + tags in same rule) Updates #2990
1231 lines
39 KiB
Go
1231 lines
39 KiB
Go
package v2
|
|
|
|
import (
|
|
"net/netip"
|
|
"slices"
|
|
"testing"
|
|
|
|
"github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp"
|
|
"github.com/juanfont/headscale/hscontrol/policy/matcher"
|
|
"github.com/juanfont/headscale/hscontrol/types"
|
|
"github.com/stretchr/testify/require"
|
|
"gorm.io/gorm"
|
|
"tailscale.com/tailcfg"
|
|
"tailscale.com/types/ptr"
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
func node(name, ipv4, ipv6 string, user types.User, hostinfo *tailcfg.Hostinfo) *types.Node {
|
|
return &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 0,
|
|
Hostname: name,
|
|
IPv4: ap(ipv4),
|
|
IPv6: ap(ipv6),
|
|
User: ptr.To(user),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(user.ID),
|
|
Hostinfo: hostinfo,
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func TestPolicyManager(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "testuser", Email: "testuser@headscale.net"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "otheruser", Email: "otheruser@headscale.net"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
tests := []struct {
|
|
name string
|
|
pol string
|
|
nodes types.Nodes
|
|
wantFilter []tailcfg.FilterRule
|
|
wantMatchers []matcher.Match
|
|
}{
|
|
{
|
|
name: "empty-policy",
|
|
pol: "{}",
|
|
nodes: types.Nodes{},
|
|
wantFilter: tailcfg.FilterAllowAll,
|
|
wantMatchers: matcher.MatchesFromFilterRules(tailcfg.FilterAllowAll),
|
|
},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
for _, tt := range tests {
|
|
t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) {
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(tt.pol), users, tt.nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
filter, matchers := pm.Filter()
|
|
if diff := cmp.Diff(tt.wantFilter, filter); diff != "" {
|
|
t.Errorf("Filter() filter mismatch (-want +got):\n%s", diff)
|
|
}
|
|
if diff := cmp.Diff(
|
|
tt.wantMatchers,
|
|
matchers,
|
|
cmp.AllowUnexported(matcher.Match{}),
|
|
); diff != "" {
|
|
t.Errorf("Filter() matchers mismatch (-want +got):\n%s", diff)
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TODO(kradalby): Test SSH Policy
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
func TestInvalidateAutogroupSelfCache(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "user1", Email: "user1@headscale.net"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "user2", Email: "user2@headscale.net"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 3}, Name: "user3", Email: "user3@headscale.net"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
initialNodes := types.Nodes{
|
|
node("user1-node1", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user1-node2", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user2-node1", "100.64.0.3", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::3", users[1], nil),
|
|
node("user3-node1", "100.64.0.4", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::4", users[2], nil),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
for i, n := range initialNodes {
|
|
n.ID = types.NodeID(i + 1)
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, initialNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
// Add to cache by calling FilterForNode for each node
|
|
for _, n := range initialNodes {
|
|
_, err := pm.FilterForNode(n.View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
require.Equal(t, len(initialNodes), len(pm.filterRulesMap))
|
|
|
|
tests := []struct {
|
|
name string
|
|
newNodes types.Nodes
|
|
expectedCleared int
|
|
description string
|
|
}{
|
|
{
|
|
name: "no_changes",
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
node("user1-node1", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user1-node2", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user2-node1", "100.64.0.3", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::3", users[1], nil),
|
|
node("user3-node1", "100.64.0.4", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::4", users[2], nil),
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCleared: 0,
|
|
description: "No changes should clear no cache entries",
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "node_added",
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
node("user1-node1", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user1-node2", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user1-node3", "100.64.0.5", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::5", users[0], nil), // New node
|
|
node("user2-node1", "100.64.0.3", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::3", users[1], nil),
|
|
node("user3-node1", "100.64.0.4", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::4", users[2], nil),
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCleared: 2, // user1's existing nodes should be cleared
|
|
description: "Adding a node should clear cache for that user's existing nodes",
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "node_removed",
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
node("user1-node1", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1", users[0], nil),
|
|
// user1-node2 removed
|
|
node("user2-node1", "100.64.0.3", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::3", users[1], nil),
|
|
node("user3-node1", "100.64.0.4", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::4", users[2], nil),
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCleared: 2, // user1's remaining node + removed node should be cleared
|
|
description: "Removing a node should clear cache for that user's remaining nodes",
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "user_changed",
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
node("user1-node1", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user1-node2", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2", users[2], nil), // Changed to user3
|
|
node("user2-node1", "100.64.0.3", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::3", users[1], nil),
|
|
node("user3-node1", "100.64.0.4", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::4", users[2], nil),
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCleared: 3, // user1's node + user2's node + user3's nodes should be cleared
|
|
description: "Changing a node's user should clear cache for both old and new users",
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "ip_changed",
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
node("user1-node1", "100.64.0.10", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::10", users[0], nil), // IP changed
|
|
node("user1-node2", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2", users[0], nil),
|
|
node("user2-node1", "100.64.0.3", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::3", users[1], nil),
|
|
node("user3-node1", "100.64.0.4", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::4", users[2], nil),
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCleared: 2, // user1's nodes should be cleared
|
|
description: "Changing a node's IP should clear cache for that user's nodes",
|
|
},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
for _, tt := range tests {
|
|
t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) {
|
|
for i, n := range tt.newNodes {
|
|
found := false
|
|
for _, origNode := range initialNodes {
|
|
if n.Hostname == origNode.Hostname {
|
|
n.ID = origNode.ID
|
|
found = true
|
|
break
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
if !found {
|
|
n.ID = types.NodeID(len(initialNodes) + i + 1)
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pm.filterRulesMap = make(map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule)
|
|
for _, n := range initialNodes {
|
|
_, err := pm.FilterForNode(n.View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
initialCacheSize := len(pm.filterRulesMap)
|
|
require.Equal(t, len(initialNodes), initialCacheSize)
|
|
|
|
pm.invalidateAutogroupSelfCache(initialNodes.ViewSlice(), tt.newNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Verify the expected number of cache entries were cleared
|
|
finalCacheSize := len(pm.filterRulesMap)
|
|
clearedEntries := initialCacheSize - finalCacheSize
|
|
require.Equal(t, tt.expectedCleared, clearedEntries, tt.description)
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestInvalidateGlobalPolicyCache tests the cache invalidation logic for global policies.
|
|
func TestInvalidateGlobalPolicyCache(t *testing.T) {
|
|
mustIPPtr := func(s string) *netip.Addr {
|
|
ip := netip.MustParseAddr(s)
|
|
return &ip
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
tests := []struct {
|
|
name string
|
|
oldNodes types.Nodes
|
|
newNodes types.Nodes
|
|
initialCache map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule
|
|
expectedCacheAfter map[types.NodeID]bool // true = should exist, false = should not exist
|
|
}{
|
|
{
|
|
name: "node property changed - invalidates only that node",
|
|
oldNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.99")}, // Changed
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")}, // Unchanged
|
|
},
|
|
initialCache: map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule{
|
|
1: {},
|
|
2: {},
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCacheAfter: map[types.NodeID]bool{
|
|
1: false, // Invalidated
|
|
2: true, // Preserved
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "multiple nodes changed",
|
|
oldNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 3, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.3")},
|
|
},
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.99")}, // Changed
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")}, // Unchanged
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 3, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.88")}, // Changed
|
|
},
|
|
initialCache: map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule{
|
|
1: {},
|
|
2: {},
|
|
3: {},
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCacheAfter: map[types.NodeID]bool{
|
|
1: false, // Invalidated
|
|
2: true, // Preserved
|
|
3: false, // Invalidated
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "node deleted - removes from cache",
|
|
oldNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
initialCache: map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule{
|
|
1: {},
|
|
2: {},
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCacheAfter: map[types.NodeID]bool{
|
|
1: false, // Deleted
|
|
2: true, // Preserved
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "node added - no cache invalidation needed",
|
|
oldNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
},
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")}, // New
|
|
},
|
|
initialCache: map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule{
|
|
1: {},
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCacheAfter: map[types.NodeID]bool{
|
|
1: true, // Preserved
|
|
2: false, // Not in cache (new node)
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "no changes - preserves all cache",
|
|
oldNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 1, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1")},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
initialCache: map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule{
|
|
1: {},
|
|
2: {},
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCacheAfter: map[types.NodeID]bool{
|
|
1: true,
|
|
2: true,
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
name: "routes changed - invalidates that node only",
|
|
oldNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{RoutableIPs: []netip.Prefix{netip.MustParsePrefix("10.0.0.0/24"), netip.MustParsePrefix("192.168.0.0/24")}},
|
|
ApprovedRoutes: []netip.Prefix{netip.MustParsePrefix("10.0.0.0/24")},
|
|
},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
newNodes: types.Nodes{
|
|
&types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{RoutableIPs: []netip.Prefix{netip.MustParsePrefix("10.0.0.0/24"), netip.MustParsePrefix("192.168.0.0/24")}},
|
|
ApprovedRoutes: []netip.Prefix{netip.MustParsePrefix("192.168.0.0/24")}, // Changed
|
|
},
|
|
&types.Node{ID: 2, IPv4: mustIPPtr("100.64.0.2")},
|
|
},
|
|
initialCache: map[types.NodeID][]tailcfg.FilterRule{
|
|
1: {},
|
|
2: {},
|
|
},
|
|
expectedCacheAfter: map[types.NodeID]bool{
|
|
1: false, // Invalidated
|
|
2: true, // Preserved
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
for _, tt := range tests {
|
|
t.Run(tt.name, func(t *testing.T) {
|
|
pm := &PolicyManager{
|
|
nodes: tt.oldNodes.ViewSlice(),
|
|
filterRulesMap: tt.initialCache,
|
|
usesAutogroupSelf: false,
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
pm.invalidateGlobalPolicyCache(tt.newNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Verify cache state
|
|
for nodeID, shouldExist := range tt.expectedCacheAfter {
|
|
_, exists := pm.filterRulesMap[nodeID]
|
|
require.Equal(t, shouldExist, exists, "node %d cache existence mismatch", nodeID)
|
|
}
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestAutogroupSelfReducedVsUnreducedRules verifies that:
|
|
// 1. BuildPeerMap uses unreduced compiled rules for determining peer relationships
|
|
// 2. FilterForNode returns reduced compiled rules for packet filters
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfReducedVsUnreducedRules(t *testing.T) {
|
|
user1 := types.User{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "user1", Email: "user1@headscale.net"}
|
|
user2 := types.User{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "user2", Email: "user2@headscale.net"}
|
|
users := types.Users{user1, user2}
|
|
|
|
// Create two nodes
|
|
node1 := node("node1", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1", user1, nil)
|
|
node1.ID = 1
|
|
node2 := node("node2", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2", user2, nil)
|
|
node2.ID = 2
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{node1, node2}
|
|
|
|
// Policy with autogroup:self - all members can reach their own devices
|
|
policyStr := `{
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policyStr), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.True(t, pm.usesAutogroupSelf, "policy should use autogroup:self")
|
|
|
|
// Test FilterForNode returns reduced rules
|
|
// For node1: should have rules where node1 is in destinations (its own IP)
|
|
filterNode1, err := pm.FilterForNode(nodes[0].View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
// For node2: should have rules where node2 is in destinations (its own IP)
|
|
filterNode2, err := pm.FilterForNode(nodes[1].View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
// FilterForNode should return reduced rules - verify they only contain the node's own IPs as destinations
|
|
// For node1, destinations should only be node1's IPs
|
|
node1IPs := []string{"100.64.0.1/32", "100.64.0.1", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1/128", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"}
|
|
for _, rule := range filterNode1 {
|
|
for _, dst := range rule.DstPorts {
|
|
require.Contains(t, node1IPs, dst.IP,
|
|
"node1 filter should only contain node1's IPs as destinations")
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// For node2, destinations should only be node2's IPs
|
|
node2IPs := []string{"100.64.0.2/32", "100.64.0.2", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2/128", "fd7a:115c:a1e0::2"}
|
|
for _, rule := range filterNode2 {
|
|
for _, dst := range rule.DstPorts {
|
|
require.Contains(t, node2IPs, dst.IP,
|
|
"node2 filter should only contain node2's IPs as destinations")
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Test BuildPeerMap uses unreduced rules
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// According to the policy, user1 can reach autogroup:self (which expands to node1's own IPs for node1)
|
|
// So node1 should be able to reach itself, but since we're looking at peer relationships,
|
|
// node1 should NOT have itself in the peer map (nodes don't peer with themselves)
|
|
// node2 should also not have any peers since user2 has no rules allowing it to reach anyone
|
|
|
|
// Verify peer relationships based on unreduced rules
|
|
// With unreduced rules, BuildPeerMap can properly determine that:
|
|
// - node1 can access autogroup:self (its own IPs)
|
|
// - node2 cannot access node1
|
|
require.Empty(t, peerMap[node1.ID], "node1 should have no peers (can only reach itself)")
|
|
require.Empty(t, peerMap[node2.ID], "node2 should have no peers")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// When separate ACL rules exist (one with autogroup:self, one with tag:router),
|
|
// the autogroup:self rule should not prevent the tag:router rule from working.
|
|
// This ensures that autogroup:self doesn't interfere with other ACL rules.
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfWithOtherRules(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "test-1", Email: "test-1@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "test-2", Email: "test-2@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// test-1 has a regular device
|
|
test1Node := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "test-1-device",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// test-2 has a router device with tag:node-router
|
|
test2RouterNode := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "test-2-router",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::2"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:node-router"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{test1Node, test2RouterNode}
|
|
|
|
// This matches the exact policy from issue #2838:
|
|
// - First rule: autogroup:member -> autogroup:self (allows users to see their own devices)
|
|
// - Second rule: group:home -> tag:node-router (should allow group members to see router)
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"groups": {
|
|
"group:home": ["test-1@example.com", "test-2@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:node-router": ["group:home"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:home"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:node-router:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// test-1 (in group:home) should see:
|
|
// 1. Their own node (from autogroup:self rule)
|
|
// 2. The router node (from group:home -> tag:node-router rule)
|
|
test1Peers := peerMap[test1Node.ID]
|
|
|
|
// Verify test-1 can see the router (group:home -> tag:node-router rule)
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(test1Peers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == test2RouterNode.ID
|
|
}), "test-1 should see test-2's router via group:home -> tag:node-router rule, even when autogroup:self rule exists (issue #2838)")
|
|
|
|
// Verify that test-1 has filter rules (including autogroup:self and tag:node-router access)
|
|
rules, err := pm.FilterForNode(test1Node.View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.NotEmpty(t, rules, "test-1 should have filter rules from both ACL rules")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestAutogroupSelfPolicyUpdateTriggersMapResponse verifies that when a policy with
|
|
// autogroup:self is updated, SetPolicy returns true to trigger MapResponse updates,
|
|
// even if the global filter hash didn't change (which is always empty for autogroup:self).
|
|
// This fixes the issue where policy updates would clear caches but not trigger updates,
|
|
// leaving nodes with stale filter rules until reconnect.
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfPolicyUpdateTriggersMapResponse(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "test-1", Email: "test-1@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "test-2", Email: "test-2@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
test1Node := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "test-1-device",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
test2Node := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "test-2-device",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::2"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{test1Node, test2Node}
|
|
|
|
// Initial policy with autogroup:self
|
|
initialPolicy := `{
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(initialPolicy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.True(t, pm.usesAutogroupSelf, "policy should use autogroup:self")
|
|
|
|
// Get initial filter rules for test-1 (should be cached)
|
|
rules1, err := pm.FilterForNode(test1Node.View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.NotEmpty(t, rules1, "test-1 should have filter rules")
|
|
|
|
// Update policy with a different ACL that still results in empty global filter
|
|
// (only autogroup:self rules, which compile to empty global filter)
|
|
// We add a comment/description change by adding groups (which don't affect filter compilation)
|
|
updatedPolicy := `{
|
|
"groups": {
|
|
"group:test": ["test-1@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
// SetPolicy should return true even though global filter hash didn't change
|
|
policyChanged, err := pm.SetPolicy([]byte(updatedPolicy))
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.True(t, policyChanged, "SetPolicy should return true when policy content changes, even if global filter hash unchanged (autogroup:self)")
|
|
|
|
// Verify that caches were cleared and new rules are generated
|
|
// The cache should be empty, so FilterForNode will recompile
|
|
rules2, err := pm.FilterForNode(test1Node.View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.NotEmpty(t, rules2, "test-1 should have filter rules after policy update")
|
|
|
|
// Verify that the policy hash tracking works - a second identical update should return false
|
|
policyChanged2, err := pm.SetPolicy([]byte(updatedPolicy))
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.False(t, policyChanged2, "SetPolicy should return false when policy content hasn't changed")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestTagPropagationToPeerMap tests that when a node's tags change,
|
|
// the peer map is correctly updated. This is a regression test for
|
|
// https://github.com/juanfont/headscale/issues/2389
|
|
func TestTagPropagationToPeerMap(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "user1", Email: "user1@headscale.net"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "user2", Email: "user2@headscale.net"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Policy: user2 can access tag:web nodes
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:web": ["user1@headscale.net"],
|
|
"tag:internal": ["user1@headscale.net"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["user2@headscale.net"],
|
|
"dst": ["user2@headscale.net:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["user2@headscale.net"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:web:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["tag:web"],
|
|
"dst": ["user2@headscale.net:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
// user1's node starts with tag:web and tag:internal
|
|
user1Node := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "user1-node",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:web", "tag:internal"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// user2's node (no tags)
|
|
user2Node := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "user2-node",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::2"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
initialNodes := types.Nodes{user1Node, user2Node}
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, initialNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
// Initial state: user2 should see user1 as a peer (user1 has tag:web)
|
|
initialPeerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(initialNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Check user2's peers - should include user1
|
|
user2Peers := initialPeerMap[user2Node.ID]
|
|
require.Len(t, user2Peers, 1, "user2 should have 1 peer initially (user1 with tag:web)")
|
|
require.Equal(t, user1Node.ID, user2Peers[0].ID(), "user2's peer should be user1")
|
|
|
|
// Check user1's peers - should include user2 (bidirectional ACL)
|
|
user1Peers := initialPeerMap[user1Node.ID]
|
|
require.Len(t, user1Peers, 1, "user1 should have 1 peer initially (user2)")
|
|
require.Equal(t, user2Node.ID, user1Peers[0].ID(), "user1's peer should be user2")
|
|
|
|
// Now change user1's tags: remove tag:web, keep only tag:internal
|
|
user1NodeUpdated := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "user1-node",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:internal"}, // tag:web removed!
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
updatedNodes := types.Nodes{user1NodeUpdated, user2Node}
|
|
|
|
// SetNodes should detect the tag change
|
|
changed, err := pm.SetNodes(updatedNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.True(t, changed, "SetNodes should return true when tags change")
|
|
|
|
// After tag change: user2 should NOT see user1 as a peer anymore
|
|
// (no ACL allows user2 to access tag:internal)
|
|
updatedPeerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(updatedNodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Check user2's peers - should be empty now
|
|
user2PeersAfter := updatedPeerMap[user2Node.ID]
|
|
require.Empty(t, user2PeersAfter, "user2 should have no peers after tag:web is removed from user1")
|
|
|
|
// Check user1's peers - should also be empty
|
|
user1PeersAfter := updatedPeerMap[user1Node.ID]
|
|
require.Empty(t, user1PeersAfter, "user1 should have no peers after tag:web is removed")
|
|
|
|
// Also verify MatchersForNode returns non-empty matchers and ReduceNodes filters correctly
|
|
// This simulates what buildTailPeers does in the mapper
|
|
matchersForUser2, err := pm.MatchersForNode(user2Node.View())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
require.NotEmpty(t, matchersForUser2, "MatchersForNode should return non-empty matchers (at least self-access rule)")
|
|
|
|
// Test ReduceNodes logic with the updated nodes and matchers
|
|
// This is what buildTailPeers does - it takes peers from ListPeers (which might include user1)
|
|
// and filters them using ReduceNodes with the updated matchers
|
|
// Inline the ReduceNodes logic to avoid import cycle
|
|
user2View := user2Node.View()
|
|
user1UpdatedView := user1NodeUpdated.View()
|
|
|
|
// Check if user2 can access user1 OR user1 can access user2
|
|
canAccess := user2View.CanAccess(matchersForUser2, user1UpdatedView) ||
|
|
user1UpdatedView.CanAccess(matchersForUser2, user2View)
|
|
|
|
require.False(t, canAccess, "user2 should NOT be able to access user1 after tag:web is removed (ReduceNodes should filter out)")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestAutogroupSelfWithAdminOverride reproduces issue #2990:
|
|
// When autogroup:self is combined with an admin rule (group:admin -> *:*),
|
|
// tagged nodes become invisible to admins because BuildPeerMap uses asymmetric
|
|
// peer visibility in the autogroup:self path.
|
|
//
|
|
// The fix requires symmetric visibility: if admin can access tagged node,
|
|
// BOTH admin and tagged node should see each other as peers.
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfWithAdminOverride(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "admin", Email: "admin@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "user1", Email: "user1@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Admin has a regular device
|
|
adminNode := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "admin-device",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// user1 has a tagged server
|
|
user1TaggedNode := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "user1-server",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::2"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:server"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{adminNode, user1TaggedNode}
|
|
|
|
// Policy from issue #2990:
|
|
// - group:admin has full access to everything (*:*)
|
|
// - autogroup:member -> autogroup:self (allows users to see their own devices)
|
|
//
|
|
// Bug: The tagged server becomes invisible to admin because:
|
|
// 1. Admin can access tagged server (via *:* rule)
|
|
// 2. Tagged server CANNOT access admin (no rule for that)
|
|
// 3. With asymmetric logic, tagged server is not added to admin's peer list
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"groups": {
|
|
"group:admin": ["admin@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:server": ["user1@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:admin"],
|
|
"dst": ["*:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Admin should see the tagged server as a peer (via group:admin -> *:* rule)
|
|
adminPeers := peerMap[adminNode.ID]
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(adminPeers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == user1TaggedNode.ID
|
|
}), "admin should see tagged server as peer via *:* rule (issue #2990)")
|
|
|
|
// Tagged server should also see admin as a peer (symmetric visibility)
|
|
// Even though tagged server cannot ACCESS admin, it should still SEE admin
|
|
// because admin CAN access it. This is required for proper network operation.
|
|
taggedPeers := peerMap[user1TaggedNode.ID]
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(taggedPeers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == adminNode.ID
|
|
}), "tagged server should see admin as peer (symmetric visibility)")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestAutogroupSelfSymmetricVisibility verifies that peer visibility is symmetric:
|
|
// if node A can access node B, then both A and B should see each other as peers.
|
|
// This is the same behavior as the global filter path.
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfSymmetricVisibility(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "user1", Email: "user1@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "user2", Email: "user2@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// user1 has device A
|
|
deviceA := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "device-a",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::1"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// user2 has device B (tagged)
|
|
deviceB := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "device-b",
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
IPv6: ap("fd7a:115c:a1e0::2"),
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:web"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{deviceA, deviceB}
|
|
|
|
// One-way rule: user1 can access tag:web, but tag:web cannot access user1
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:web": ["user2@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["user1@example.com"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:web:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["autogroup:member"],
|
|
"dst": ["autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Device A (user1) should see device B (tag:web) as peer
|
|
aPeers := peerMap[deviceA.ID]
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(aPeers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == deviceB.ID
|
|
}), "device A should see device B as peer (user1 -> tag:web rule)")
|
|
|
|
// Device B (tag:web) should ALSO see device A as peer (symmetric visibility)
|
|
// Even though B cannot ACCESS A, B should still SEE A as a peer
|
|
bPeers := peerMap[deviceB.ID]
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(bPeers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == deviceA.ID
|
|
}), "device B should see device A as peer (symmetric visibility)")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestAutogroupSelfDoesNotBreakOtherUsersAccess reproduces the Discord scenario
|
|
// where enabling autogroup:self for superadmins should NOT break access for
|
|
// other users who don't use autogroup:self.
|
|
//
|
|
// Scenario:
|
|
// - Rule 1: [superadmin, admin, direction] -> [tag:common:*]
|
|
// - Rule 2: [superadmin, admin] -> [tag:tech:*]
|
|
// - Rule 3: [superadmin] -> [tag:privileged:*, autogroup:self:*]
|
|
//
|
|
// Expected behavior:
|
|
// - Superadmin sees: tag:common, tag:tech, tag:privileged, and own devices
|
|
// - Admin sees: tag:common, tag:tech
|
|
// - Direction sees: tag:common
|
|
// - All tagged nodes should be visible to users who can access them.
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfDoesNotBreakOtherUsersAccess(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "superadmin", Email: "superadmin@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "admin", Email: "admin@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 3}, Name: "direction", Email: "direction@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 4}, Name: "tagowner", Email: "tagowner@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Create nodes:
|
|
// - superadmin's device
|
|
// - admin's device
|
|
// - direction's device
|
|
// - tagged server (tag:common)
|
|
// - tagged server (tag:tech)
|
|
// - tagged server (tag:privileged)
|
|
|
|
superadminDevice := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "superadmin-laptop",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
adminDevice := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "admin-laptop",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
directionDevice := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 3,
|
|
Hostname: "direction-laptop",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[2]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[2].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.3"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
commonServer := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 4,
|
|
Hostname: "common-server",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[3]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[3].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.4"),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:common"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
techServer := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 5,
|
|
Hostname: "tech-server",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[3]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[3].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.5"),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:tech"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
privilegedServer := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 6,
|
|
Hostname: "privileged-server",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[3]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[3].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.6"),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:privileged"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{
|
|
superadminDevice,
|
|
adminDevice,
|
|
directionDevice,
|
|
commonServer,
|
|
techServer,
|
|
privilegedServer,
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"groups": {
|
|
"group:superadmin": ["superadmin@example.com"],
|
|
"group:admin": ["admin@example.com"],
|
|
"group:direction": ["direction@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:common": ["tagowner@example.com"],
|
|
"tag:tech": ["tagowner@example.com"],
|
|
"tag:privileged": ["tagowner@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:superadmin", "group:admin", "group:direction"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:common:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:superadmin", "group:admin"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:tech:*"]
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:superadmin"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:privileged:*", "autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Helper to check if node A sees node B
|
|
canSee := func(a, b types.NodeID) bool {
|
|
peers := peerMap[a]
|
|
|
|
return slices.ContainsFunc(peers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == b
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Superadmin should see all tagged servers
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(superadminDevice.ID, commonServer.ID),
|
|
"superadmin should see tag:common")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(superadminDevice.ID, techServer.ID),
|
|
"superadmin should see tag:tech")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(superadminDevice.ID, privilegedServer.ID),
|
|
"superadmin should see tag:privileged")
|
|
|
|
// Admin should see tag:common and tag:tech (but NOT tag:privileged)
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(adminDevice.ID, commonServer.ID),
|
|
"admin should see tag:common")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(adminDevice.ID, techServer.ID),
|
|
"admin should see tag:tech")
|
|
require.False(t, canSee(adminDevice.ID, privilegedServer.ID),
|
|
"admin should NOT see tag:privileged")
|
|
|
|
// Direction should see tag:common only
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(directionDevice.ID, commonServer.ID),
|
|
"direction should see tag:common")
|
|
require.False(t, canSee(directionDevice.ID, techServer.ID),
|
|
"direction should NOT see tag:tech")
|
|
require.False(t, canSee(directionDevice.ID, privilegedServer.ID),
|
|
"direction should NOT see tag:privileged")
|
|
|
|
// Tagged servers should see their authorized users (symmetric visibility)
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(commonServer.ID, superadminDevice.ID),
|
|
"tag:common should see superadmin (symmetric)")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(commonServer.ID, adminDevice.ID),
|
|
"tag:common should see admin (symmetric)")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(commonServer.ID, directionDevice.ID),
|
|
"tag:common should see direction (symmetric)")
|
|
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(techServer.ID, superadminDevice.ID),
|
|
"tag:tech should see superadmin (symmetric)")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(techServer.ID, adminDevice.ID),
|
|
"tag:tech should see admin (symmetric)")
|
|
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(privilegedServer.ID, superadminDevice.ID),
|
|
"tag:privileged should see superadmin (symmetric)")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestEmptyFilterNodesStillVisible verifies that nodes with empty filter rules
|
|
// (e.g., tagged servers that are only destinations, never sources) are still
|
|
// visible to nodes that can access them.
|
|
func TestEmptyFilterNodesStillVisible(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "admin", Email: "admin@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "tagowner", Email: "tagowner@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
adminDevice := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "admin-laptop",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Tagged server - only a destination, never a source in any rule
|
|
// This means its compiled filter rules will be empty
|
|
taggedServer := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "server",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:server"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{adminDevice, taggedServer}
|
|
|
|
// Policy where tagged server is ONLY a destination
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"groups": {
|
|
"group:admin": ["admin@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:server": ["tagowner@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:admin"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:server:*", "autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Admin should see the tagged server
|
|
adminPeers := peerMap[adminDevice.ID]
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(adminPeers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == taggedServer.ID
|
|
}), "admin should see tagged server")
|
|
|
|
// Tagged server should see admin (symmetric visibility)
|
|
// Even though the server has no outbound rules (empty filter)
|
|
serverPeers := peerMap[taggedServer.ID]
|
|
require.True(t, slices.ContainsFunc(serverPeers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == adminDevice.ID
|
|
}), "tagged server should see admin (symmetric visibility)")
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// TestAutogroupSelfCombinedWithTags verifies that autogroup:self combined with
|
|
// specific tags in the same rule provides "combined access" - users get both
|
|
// tagged nodes AND their own devices.
|
|
func TestAutogroupSelfCombinedWithTags(t *testing.T) {
|
|
users := types.Users{
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 1}, Name: "admin", Email: "admin@example.com"},
|
|
{Model: gorm.Model{ID: 2}, Name: "tagowner", Email: "tagowner@example.com"},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Admin has two devices
|
|
adminLaptop := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 1,
|
|
Hostname: "admin-laptop",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.1"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
adminPhone := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 2,
|
|
Hostname: "admin-phone",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[0]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[0].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.2"),
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Tagged web server
|
|
webServer := &types.Node{
|
|
ID: 3,
|
|
Hostname: "web-server",
|
|
User: ptr.To(users[1]),
|
|
UserID: ptr.To(users[1].ID),
|
|
IPv4: ap("100.64.0.3"),
|
|
Tags: []string{"tag:web"},
|
|
Hostinfo: &tailcfg.Hostinfo{},
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
nodes := types.Nodes{adminLaptop, adminPhone, webServer}
|
|
|
|
// Combined rule: admin gets both tag:web AND autogroup:self
|
|
policy := `{
|
|
"groups": {
|
|
"group:admin": ["admin@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"tagOwners": {
|
|
"tag:web": ["tagowner@example.com"]
|
|
},
|
|
"acls": [
|
|
{
|
|
"action": "accept",
|
|
"src": ["group:admin"],
|
|
"dst": ["tag:web:*", "autogroup:self:*"]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}`
|
|
|
|
pm, err := NewPolicyManager([]byte(policy), users, nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
require.NoError(t, err)
|
|
|
|
peerMap := pm.BuildPeerMap(nodes.ViewSlice())
|
|
|
|
// Helper to check visibility
|
|
canSee := func(a, b types.NodeID) bool {
|
|
peers := peerMap[a]
|
|
|
|
return slices.ContainsFunc(peers, func(n types.NodeView) bool {
|
|
return n.ID() == b
|
|
})
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
// Admin laptop should see: admin phone (autogroup:self) AND web server (tag:web)
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(adminLaptop.ID, adminPhone.ID),
|
|
"admin laptop should see admin phone (autogroup:self)")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(adminLaptop.ID, webServer.ID),
|
|
"admin laptop should see web server (tag:web)")
|
|
|
|
// Admin phone should see: admin laptop (autogroup:self) AND web server (tag:web)
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(adminPhone.ID, adminLaptop.ID),
|
|
"admin phone should see admin laptop (autogroup:self)")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(adminPhone.ID, webServer.ID),
|
|
"admin phone should see web server (tag:web)")
|
|
|
|
// Web server should see both admin devices (symmetric visibility)
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(webServer.ID, adminLaptop.ID),
|
|
"web server should see admin laptop (symmetric)")
|
|
require.True(t, canSee(webServer.ID, adminPhone.ID),
|
|
"web server should see admin phone (symmetric)")
|
|
}
|