New endpoint to allow admins to get all access requests #2888
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…quests, with auth and flexibility to return only user relevant accessRequests
…lst working around express middleware
…nticationConnector
JR40159
requested changes
Nov 12, 2025
JR40159
requested changes
Nov 12, 2025
ARADDCC002
previously approved these changes
Nov 18, 2025
JRB66955
added
enhancement
JR40159
requested changes
Nov 19, 2025
ON93754
reviewed
Nov 19, 2025
|
|
||
| // authorisation | ||
| const modelIds = results.map((result) => result.modelId) | ||
| let auths: any[] = [] |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth creating a return type for authorisation.accessRequests() so we don't have to use any here?
Although tracing through to accessRequests it looks a little more complicated than i thought
… new condition for viewing ARs
…hrough for filtering in case of no adminAccess, attempting to make the auth section cleaner?
IR96334
reviewed
Nov 24, 2025
PE39806
previously requested changes
Nov 25, 2025
…tion instead of multiple, tweaks to the query to work with new aggregation, and an updated auth loop
GB907762
reviewed
Nov 26, 2025
…et tests in a working state (to then update again)
…ed results nicer when adminAccess is true
…be same order as tests for findAccessRequests
JR40159
requested changes
Nov 28, 2025
| (await missingRequiredRole(user, model, ['owner'])) && | ||
| ([AccessRequestAction.Delete, AccessRequestAction.Update] as AccessRequestActionKeys[]).includes(action) | ||
| ) { | ||
| return { success: false, info: 'You cannot change an access request you do not own.', id: request.id } |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This authorisation function doesn't seem to be getting run for the search for some reason...?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
False alarm, a problem with my local instance
JR40159
requested changes
Nov 28, 2025
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if ( | ||
| !(await this.model(user, model, ModelAction.View)).success && |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it makes sense to update this to deny a user if they are viewing and access request and either they aren't able to view a model or they aren't named on the access request
JR40159
approved these changes
Nov 28, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
TODO:- work out api routing issue with middleware- tests tbd