Files
WatchedTogether/Jellyfin.Plugin.WatchedTogether.Tests/SharedAccountEndToEndTests.cs
T
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5 27cd2a3d37 Inherit parental restrictions on shared accounts, with a chosen rating cap
A shared account previously inherited its members' library access but
none of their content restrictions, so a child could log into "alice+kid"
with their own password and get around their own rating cap.

The shared account now gets the strictest member's parental rating,
unrated-item block, blocked tags and allowed tags, recomputed at
creation, on membership change and at startup. An admin can raise the
rating cap on a slider between the strictest and the loosest member;
unrated and tag rules stay strictest-wins.

What makes raising the cap safe is the unlock rule: after a member's
password matches, both users' live policies are compared and the login
is refused if the account is looser than the member on any field. So
raising the cap above the child's rating means the child's password no
longer opens the account, while the parent's still does. The same rule
bounds the slider - past the loosest member nobody could unlock the
account - so a chosen cap is clamped back into range whenever applied.

Allowed tags need care: Jellyfin reads an empty list as "no whitelist",
so an empty intersection of members' whitelists is written as a sentinel
tag no item carries. Access schedules and channels are not inherited yet.

The shared account is never an administrator. Groups created at the
login screen always inherit and are restricted before the first session
exists. The dashboard shows each member's cap, who a chosen cap shuts
out, and the restrictions in effect, and gains a per-group edit form for
the sync options.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-19 12:30:50 +02:00

170 lines
6.8 KiB
C#

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using Jellyfin.Database.Implementations.Entities;
using Jellyfin.Plugin.WatchedTogether.Auth;
using Jellyfin.Plugin.WatchedTogether.Services;
using MediaBrowser.Controller.Authentication;
using MediaBrowser.Controller.Library;
using Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions;
using Moq;
using Xunit;
namespace Jellyfin.Plugin.WatchedTogether.Tests;
/// <summary>
/// Exercises the whole path a real login takes: a group created on demand by typing "alice+bob",
/// then logged into again afterwards by each member in turn.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// The other suites mock <see cref="IProvisioningService"/>, which is why an ordering bug inside the
/// real provisioning code reached a release. These tests wire the real services together and only
/// stub the host's user manager and crypto.
/// </remarks>
[Collection(nameof(PluginTestContext))]
public class SharedAccountEndToEndTests
{
private const string AliceHash = "$PBKDF2-SHA512$iterations=210000$A1A1A1A1$AAAAAAAABBBBBBBB";
private const string BobHash = "$PBKDF2-SHA512$iterations=210000$B2B2B2B2$CCCCCCCCDDDDDDDD";
private static readonly string AuthProviderId =
typeof(SharedAccountAuthenticationProvider).FullName!;
private sealed record Harness(
SharedAccountAuthenticationProvider Provider,
List<User> Users);
private static User MakeUser(string name, string? password = null)
=> new(name, "Prov", "ResetProv") { Password = password! };
/// <summary>
/// Wires the real provisioning, group, dynamic-group and authentication services over a user
/// manager that behaves like Jellyfin's: password changes dispatch to the user's assigned
/// provider, and users resolve by both name and id.
/// </summary>
private static Harness MakeHarness(List<User> users, params (string Hash, string Password)[] validPairs)
{
var crypto = new StubCryptoProvider(validPairs);
var userManager = new Mock<IUserManager>();
userManager.Setup(m => m.GetUserById(It.IsAny<Guid>()))
.Returns((Guid id) => users.Find(u => u.Id == id)!);
userManager.Setup(m => m.GetUserByName(It.IsAny<string>()))
.Returns((string n) => users.Find(
u => string.Equals(u.Username, n, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase))!);
userManager.Setup(m => m.CreateUserAsync(It.IsAny<string>()))
.ReturnsAsync((string name) =>
{
var created = MakeUser(name);
users.Add(created);
return created;
});
userManager.Setup(m => m.UpdateUserAsync(It.IsAny<User>())).Returns(Task.CompletedTask);
userManager.SetupPolicyRoundTrip(users);
userManager.SetupChangePassword(users, (user, password) =>
{
// Jellyfin routes this to the user's assigned provider; ours refuses by design.
if (string.Equals(user.AuthenticationProviderId, AuthProviderId, StringComparison.Ordinal))
{
throw new NotSupportedException(
"A Watched Together shared account has no password of its own.");
}
user.Password = password;
return Task.CompletedTask;
});
var groupService = new GroupService(
userManager.Object,
NullLogger<GroupService>.Instance);
// The real restriction service, over the same user manager: the unlock rule reads users
// live, and this suite is about the real path.
var restrictions = new RestrictionService(
userManager.Object,
NullLogger<RestrictionService>.Instance);
var provisioning = new ProvisioningService(
userManager.Object,
Mock.Of<ILibraryAccessService>(),
restrictions,
NullLogger<ProvisioningService>.Instance);
var dynamicGroups = new DynamicGroupService(
userManager.Object,
provisioning,
restrictions,
crypto,
NullLogger<DynamicGroupService>.Instance);
var provider = new SharedAccountAuthenticationProvider(
crypto,
new Lazy<IGroupService>(() => groupService),
new Lazy<IDynamicGroupService>(() => dynamicGroups),
new Lazy<IRestrictionService>(() => restrictions),
NullLogger<SharedAccountAuthenticationProvider>.Instance);
return new Harness(provider, users);
}
[Theory]
[InlineData("alice-pw")]
[InlineData("bob-pw")]
public async Task GroupCreatedOnDemand_ThenUnlockedByEitherMemberPassword(string creatingPassword)
{
using var ctx = PluginTestContext.Create();
var alice = MakeUser("alice", AliceHash);
var bob = MakeUser("bob", BobHash);
var users = new List<User> { alice, bob };
var h = MakeHarness(users, (AliceHash, "alice-pw"), (BobHash, "bob-pw"));
// Creating the group by typing both names. Whichever member types their own password, the
// resulting account must behave identically.
var created = await h.Provider.Authenticate("alice+bob", creatingPassword, null);
Assert.Equal("alice+bob", created.Username);
var shared = h.Users.Find(u => u.Username == "alice+bob");
Assert.NotNull(shared);
// The account exists now, so Jellyfin resolves it and hands it to us as resolvedUser. Both
// members must be able to unlock it, regardless of who created it.
var asAlice = await h.Provider.Authenticate("alice+bob", "alice-pw", shared);
Assert.Equal("alice+bob", asAlice.Username);
var asBob = await h.Provider.Authenticate("alice+bob", "bob-pw", shared);
Assert.Equal("alice+bob", asBob.Username);
// And an outsider's password still must not.
await Assert.ThrowsAsync<AuthenticationException>(
() => h.Provider.Authenticate("alice+bob", "not-a-member-pw", shared!));
}
[Fact]
public async Task GroupCreatedOnDemand_ClaimsTheAccountAndKeepsAPassword()
{
using var ctx = PluginTestContext.Create();
var alice = MakeUser("alice", AliceHash);
var bob = MakeUser("bob", BobHash);
var users = new List<User> { alice, bob };
var h = MakeHarness(users, (AliceHash, "alice-pw"), (BobHash, "bob-pw"));
await h.Provider.Authenticate("alice+bob", "alice-pw", null);
var shared = h.Users.Find(u => u.Username == "alice+bob");
Assert.NotNull(shared);
// Claimed by us, so future logins route here, and holding a password of its own so it is
// not directly loginable if the provider is ever unassigned.
Assert.Equal(AuthProviderId, shared!.AuthenticationProviderId);
Assert.False(string.IsNullOrEmpty(shared.Password));
}
}