test: add tag-descendant partial-permission coverage, verify pre-migration characterization

Adds TestBulkEditObjectsTagDescendantPartialPermission, exercising the
tag-descendant-expansion block in BulkEditObjectsView.post as a
non-superuser with object-level change_tag granted on a parent tag and
one of two children but not the other, confirming the expansion only
pulls in descendants the requester actually has permission on.

Verified both this test and the existing apply_to_all boundary test
pass unchanged against the pre-migration
get_objects_for_user_owner_aware/has_perms_owner_aware code (reverted
via a scratch patch of the prior commit's views.py hunk, then
restored), confirming they characterize genuine pre-existing behavior
rather than something the permitted_object_ids migration made
necessary.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UmMBGW9FKyDgmKRJ5H9rif
This commit is contained in:
stumpylog
2026-08-06 21:12:42 -07:00
committed by Trenton H
co-authored by Claude Sonnet 5
parent 5ba8125293
commit 4bf3825357
@@ -690,3 +690,78 @@ class TestBulkEditObjectsApplyToAllPermissionBoundary:
hidden.refresh_from_db()
assert visible.owner == requester
assert hidden.owner == owner
@pytest.mark.django_db
class TestBulkEditObjectsTagDescendantPartialPermission:
def test_apply_to_all_descendant_expansion_respects_per_object_permissions(
self,
rest_api_client,
):
"""
GIVEN:
- A tag hierarchy (parent -> permitted_child, unpermitted_child)
- A non-superuser requester with object-level change_tag granted
on the parent and on only ONE of the two children
WHEN:
- bulk_edit_objects is called with all=True and a filter that
matches only the root (parent) tag, engaging the
tag-descendant-expansion logic in BulkEditObjectsView.post
THEN:
- The descendant expansion only pulls in descendants the
requester actually has permission on: the permitted child's
owner is reassigned alongside the parent's, while the
unpermitted child keeps its original owner. This pins that the
expansion checks per-object permissions (editable_ids), not
merely "is a descendant of a filter match".
NOTE: this uses ``set_permissions`` (owner reassignment) rather than
``delete`` as the operation, because Tag.tn_parent (django-treenode)
cascades deletes to descendants at the database/ORM level regardless
of which tags the view resolved into ``objs`` -- a delete-based test
would pass/fail based on FK cascade behavior, not on whether the
descendant-expansion logic itself respected per-object permissions.
"""
owner = User.objects.create_user(username="tag_hierarchy_owner")
requester = User.objects.create_user(username="tag_hierarchy_requester")
# global change_tag permission so the has_perm() gate passes and the
# object-level permitted_object_ids filtering is what's under test
requester.user_permissions.add(
Permission.objects.get(codename="change_tag"),
)
rest_api_client.force_authenticate(user=requester)
parent = TagFactory(owner=owner, name="parent-tag")
permitted_child = TagFactory(
owner=owner,
name="permitted-child-tag",
tn_parent=parent,
)
unpermitted_child = TagFactory(
owner=owner,
name="unpermitted-child-tag",
tn_parent=parent,
)
assign_perm("change_tag", requester, parent)
assign_perm("change_tag", requester, permitted_child)
# unpermitted_child is intentionally NOT granted change_tag
response = rest_api_client.post(
"/api/bulk_edit_objects/",
{
"object_type": "tags",
"operation": "set_permissions",
"all": True,
"filters": {"is_root": True},
"owner": requester.pk,
},
format="json",
)
assert response.status_code == HTTPStatus.OK
parent.refresh_from_db()
permitted_child.refresh_from_db()
unpermitted_child.refresh_from_db()
assert parent.owner == requester
assert permitted_child.owner == requester
assert unpermitted_child.owner == owner