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

Properly account for anonymous access in Confluence #3601

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 6, 2025

Conversation

hagen-danswer
Copy link
Contributor

Description

  • Anonymous access is now properly handled for confluence server
  • permissions now properly inherit across ancestors

How Has This Been Tested?

  • tested on confluence server by changing permissions of a child/parent page for a non admin user
  • tested by removing all group access from a space and still ensuring access is given to those where the space has anonymous access is enabled

Backporting (check the box to trigger backport action)

Note: You have to check that the action passes, otherwise resolve the conflicts manually and tag the patches.

  • This PR should be backported (make sure to check that the backport attempt succeeds)

Copy link

vercel bot commented Jan 5, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
internal-search ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Jan 5, 2025 8:13pm

return set(read_access_user_emails), set(read_access_group_names)


def _get_all_page_restrictions(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: these functions are confusingly named. It's not clear what the difference between _get_all_page_restrictions and _fetch_all_page_restrictions is.

One should probably named _get_restrictons_for_page_batch and the other _get_restrictions_for_page or something similar.

Let's address this in a follow up.

@hagen-danswer hagen-danswer added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 6, 2025
@Weves Weves removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a manual request Jan 6, 2025
@Weves Weves merged commit e100a5e into main Jan 6, 2025
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants