feat(platform): support multiple policy rules per plugin (#1182)

* feat(platform): support multiple policy rules per plugin

Extend the command policy framework from single-Rule to multi-Rule
semantics. A plugin (or policy.yml) may now contribute several scoped
Rules; the engine combines them with OR -- a command is allowed when it
satisfies every axis of at least one rule. This lets one integration
apply different risk ceilings and identity restrictions to different
command groups.

The cross-plugin fail-closed boundary is preserved: two distinct plugins
both calling Restrict still aborts startup (multiple_restrict_plugins).
Single-Rule behaviour is fully backward compatible -- the rejection
reason_code / rule_name / envelope shape are byte-for-byte unchanged;
multi-rule rejection surfaces the aggregate reason_code no_matching_rule.

- engine: New keeps single-rule compat, add NewSet for OR over rules
- resolver: dedupe by owner (one plugin may contribute many rules),
  return []*Rule; yaml gains a top-level rules: list
- registrar/builder/staging: Restrict may be called more than once;
  retire the double_restrict error
- config policy show / config plugins show: emit a rules array
- inventory: PluginEntry.Rules is now a slice (fixes last-rule-wins
  overwrite when a plugin contributes multiple rules)

* fix(platform): clone rules in Builder.Restrict and inventory snapshot

Address review feedback. Builder.Restrict stored the caller's *Rule
directly, so reusing and mutating one Rule object across multiple
Restrict calls collapsed entries to the last mutation; clone the rule and
its slices on append, mirroring the staging registrar.

BuildInventory likewise reused the source Allow/Deny/Identities slices;
copy them when building the RuleView snapshot instead of relying on
cloneInventory downstream.

Add a regression test: reusing and mutating one Rule across two Restrict
calls now yields two independent rules.

* fix(platform): skip yaml when a plugin owns policy; reject empty rules list

Two policy-config robustness fixes from review:

- A malformed ~/.lark-cli/policy.yml could abort a plugin-governed
  binary. applyUserPolicyPruning read yaml before resolving, and
  build.go fail-closes on any policy error when a plugin is present.
  Plugin rules shadow yaml anyway, so skip reading yaml entirely when a
  plugin contributed rules -- an unrelated broken file on the user's
  machine can no longer lock the CLI.

- A present-but-empty "rules: []" collapsed to a single all-zero Rule
  that allows every annotated command ("looks like policy, enforces
  almost nothing"). yaml.Parse now distinguishes absent from
  present-but-empty (Rules is a pointer) and rejects the empty list.

Add regression tests for both.
This commit is contained in:
sang-neo03
2026-05-30 17:05:33 +08:00
committed by GitHub
parent b1ecf2d0f9
commit 50b3f0a2af
22 changed files with 764 additions and 216 deletions

View File

@@ -82,8 +82,8 @@ func runConfigPluginsShow(f *cmdutil.Factory) error {
"version": p.Version,
"capabilities": p.Capabilities,
}
if p.Rule != nil {
entry["rule"] = p.Rule
if len(p.Rules) > 0 {
entry["rules"] = p.Rules
}
entry["hooks"] = map[string]any{
"observers": p.Observers,

View File

@@ -59,16 +59,20 @@ func runConfigPolicyShow(f *cmdutil.Factory) error {
"source_name": sourceName,
"denied_paths": active.DeniedPaths,
}
if active.Rule != nil {
out["rule"] = map[string]any{
"name": active.Rule.Name,
"description": active.Rule.Description,
"allow": active.Rule.Allow,
"deny": active.Rule.Deny,
"max_risk": active.Rule.MaxRisk,
"identities": active.Rule.Identities,
"allow_unannotated": active.Rule.AllowUnannotated,
if len(active.Rules) > 0 {
rules := make([]map[string]any, 0, len(active.Rules))
for _, r := range active.Rules {
rules = append(rules, map[string]any{
"name": r.Name,
"description": r.Description,
"allow": r.Allow,
"deny": r.Deny,
"max_risk": r.MaxRisk,
"identities": r.Identities,
"allow_unannotated": r.AllowUnannotated,
})
}
out["rules"] = rules
}
output.PrintJson(f.IOStreams.Out, out)
return nil

View File

@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ func TestConfigPolicyShow_PluginActive(t *testing.T) {
MaxRisk: "read",
}
cmdpolicy.SetActive(&cmdpolicy.ActivePolicy{
Rule: rule,
Rules: []*platform.Rule{rule},
Source: cmdpolicy.ResolveSource{
Kind: cmdpolicy.SourcePlugin,
Name: "secaudit",
@@ -83,12 +83,16 @@ func TestConfigPolicyShow_PluginActive(t *testing.T) {
if got["denied_paths"] != float64(42) {
t.Errorf("denied_paths = %v, want 42", got["denied_paths"])
}
ruleMap, ok := got["rule"].(map[string]any)
rulesAny, ok := got["rules"].([]any)
if !ok || len(rulesAny) != 1 {
t.Fatalf("rules field missing or wrong shape: %v", got["rules"])
}
ruleMap, ok := rulesAny[0].(map[string]any)
if !ok {
t.Fatalf("rule field missing or wrong type")
t.Fatalf("rules[0] wrong type")
}
if ruleMap["name"] != "secaudit" {
t.Errorf("rule.name = %v", ruleMap["name"])
t.Errorf("rules[0].name = %v", ruleMap["name"])
}
}
@@ -101,7 +105,7 @@ func TestConfigPolicyShow_YamlSourceNameIsEmpty(t *testing.T) {
t.Cleanup(cmdpolicy.ResetActiveForTesting)
cmdpolicy.SetActive(&cmdpolicy.ActivePolicy{
Rule: &platform.Rule{Name: "my-yaml-rule"},
Rules: []*platform.Rule{{Name: "my-yaml-rule"}},
Source: cmdpolicy.ResolveSource{
Kind: cmdpolicy.SourceYAML,
Name: "/Users/alice/.lark-cli/policy.yml",

View File

@@ -36,47 +36,71 @@ const userPolicyFileName = "policy.yml"
// pluginRules carries Plugin.Restrict() contributions collected from
// the InstallAll phase; nil/empty is fine.
func applyUserPolicyPruning(rootCmd *cobra.Command, pluginRules []cmdpolicy.PluginRule) error {
yamlPath, err := userPolicyPath()
if err != nil {
// No user home dir means we cannot locate the policy. Treat
// the same as "file missing": no pruning, no error. This keeps
// non-interactive CI environments (no HOME set) running.
yamlPath = ""
// Plugin rules shadow the yaml source entirely (Resolve: plugin >
// yaml). When a plugin contributed rules we therefore do NOT even
// read ~/.lark-cli/policy.yml: build.go fail-CLOSES on any policy
// error once a plugin is present, so reading a malformed yaml here
// would let an unrelated broken file on the user's machine abort a
// plugin-governed binary -- exactly the file the plugin is supposed
// to shadow. Skipping the read keeps the shadow contract honest.
var (
yamlRules []*platform.Rule
yamlPath string
)
if len(pluginRules) == 0 {
p, perr := userPolicyPath()
if perr != nil {
// No user home dir means we cannot locate the policy. Treat
// the same as "file missing": no pruning, no error. This keeps
// non-interactive CI environments (no HOME set) running.
p = ""
}
yamlPath = p
loaded, lerr := cmdpolicy.LoadYAMLPolicy(yamlPath)
if lerr != nil {
// Yaml-only failures are fail-OPEN at the caller (warn and
// continue), but the active-policy snapshot is process-global
// and may still carry data from a previous build in long-lived
// embedders / tests. Clear it explicitly so `config policy
// show` reports "no policy" instead of a stale rule that
// doesn't reflect the current command tree.
cmdpolicy.SetActive(nil)
return lerr
}
yamlRules = loaded
}
yamlRule, err := cmdpolicy.LoadYAMLPolicy(yamlPath)
if err != nil {
// Yaml-only failures are fail-OPEN at the caller (warn and
// continue), but the active-policy snapshot is process-global
// and may still carry data from a previous build in long-lived
// embedders / tests. Clear it explicitly so `config policy
// show` reports "no policy" instead of a stale rule that
// doesn't reflect the current command tree.
cmdpolicy.SetActive(nil)
return err
}
rule, source, err := cmdpolicy.Resolve(cmdpolicy.Sources{
rules, source, err := cmdpolicy.Resolve(cmdpolicy.Sources{
PluginRules: pluginRules,
YAMLRule: yamlRule,
YAMLRules: yamlRules,
YAMLPath: yamlPath,
})
if err != nil {
cmdpolicy.SetActive(nil)
return err
}
if rule == nil {
if len(rules) == 0 {
cmdpolicy.SetActive(&cmdpolicy.ActivePolicy{Source: source})
return nil
}
engine := cmdpolicy.New(rule)
// RuleName attributes a denial to a specific rule in the envelope.
// With a single rule that is unambiguous and preserves the legacy
// envelope verbatim; with several rules a denial means "no rule
// granted it", which has no single owner, so the field is left empty
// and reason_code=no_matching_rule carries the meaning instead.
ruleName := ""
if len(rules) == 1 {
ruleName = rules[0].Name
}
engine := cmdpolicy.NewSet(rules)
decisions := engine.EvaluateAll(rootCmd)
denied := cmdpolicy.BuildDeniedByPath(rootCmd, decisions, source, rule.Name)
denied := cmdpolicy.BuildDeniedByPath(rootCmd, decisions, source, ruleName)
cmdpolicy.Apply(rootCmd, denied)
cmdpolicy.SetActive(&cmdpolicy.ActivePolicy{
Rule: rule,
Rules: rules,
Source: source,
DeniedPaths: len(denied),
})

View File

@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@ import (
"github.com/spf13/cobra"
"github.com/larksuite/cli/extension/platform"
"github.com/larksuite/cli/internal/cmdpolicy"
"github.com/larksuite/cli/internal/cmdutil"
"github.com/larksuite/cli/internal/output"
)
@@ -184,6 +186,39 @@ func TestApplyUserPolicyPruning_malformedYamlReturnsError(t *testing.T) {
}
}
// When a plugin contributed rules, a malformed user policy.yml must NOT
// abort: plugin rules shadow yaml entirely, so the broken file is never
// read. Regression -- previously LoadYAMLPolicy ran first and an
// unrelated broken yaml on the user's machine could fatal a
// plugin-governed binary (build.go fail-CLOSES on policy errors when a
// plugin is present).
func TestApplyUserPolicyPruning_pluginRulesSkipBrokenYaml(t *testing.T) {
cfgDir := tmpHome(t)
t.Cleanup(cmdpolicy.ResetActiveForTesting)
writePolicy(t, cfgDir, "::: not yaml :::") // broken on purpose
pluginRules := []cmdpolicy.PluginRule{
{PluginName: "secaudit", Rule: &platform.Rule{
Name: "docs-only",
Allow: []string{"docs/**"},
MaxRisk: "write",
}},
}
root := fakeTree(t)
if err := applyUserPolicyPruning(root, pluginRules); err != nil {
t.Fatalf("plugin rules must shadow (and skip reading) yaml; broken yaml should not error, got %v", err)
}
// Plugin rule actually applied: im/+send is outside docs/** -> hidden.
if send := findLeaf(t, root, "im", "+send"); !send.Hidden {
t.Errorf("im/+send should be hidden by plugin rule (not in docs/** allow)")
}
// docs/+update is within allow and at/below max_risk -> stays visible.
if update := findLeaf(t, root, "docs", "+update"); update.Hidden {
t.Errorf("docs/+update should remain visible under plugin rule")
}
}
// Semantically-invalid Rule (bad MaxRisk) reaches ValidateRule inside
// Resolve and produces an error. This is the safety contract: a typo in
// the rule must not silently lower the pruning bar.