Commit Graph
489 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
jcoffey-dev 69ef48239a Merge pull request 'ci: copy each release image to GHCR as a replica' (#132) from ci/ghcr-replica into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Skipped
ci / build (push) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (push) Successful in 44m28s
2026-09-30 16:34:53 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 00f00d6d75 ci: copy each release image to GHCR as a replica
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (pull_request) Successful in 6m27s
The Gitea registry stays authoritative; GHCR becomes a copy of it, the way
the GitHub repository is a copy of the Gitea one. After the tag build has
pushed the release image to the registry, a new ghcr job copies it to
ghcr.io under the same version tag and :latest with `imagetools create` --
a copy, not a rebuild, so the digest on GHCR is the digest on the registry.

Anything still pulling the old ghcr.io name, including the TrueNAS app
submission, keeps receiving releases. The job uses the run's own token and is
left out of the status reported to Gitea, so a GHCR problem cannot fail a
release.
2026-09-30 09:27:55 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 68d3ad795e Merge pull request 'ci: copy each release to GitHub after the tag build' (#131) from ci/github-release-copy into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Skipped
ci / build (push) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (push) Successful in 50m7s
2026-09-30 13:59:22 +00:00
jcoffey-dev d486747c11 Merge pull request 'ci: drop the build cache from tag image builds' (#130) from ci/tag-path-hardening into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Skipped
ci / build (push) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (push) Canceled after 6m56s
2026-09-30 13:52:24 +00:00
jcoffey-dev e69df1ae8d ci: copy each release to GitHub after the tag build
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (pull_request) Successful in 6m47s
The mirror carries tags to GitHub but not releases, so the replica's
Releases page -- and anyone watching the repository there -- stopped at the
last release made on GitHub. After the tag build has published, a new
github-release job copies the tag's Gitea release to a GitHub release: the
same notes, with PR and issue numbers rewritten to Gitea links, the same
files, and a line pointing back to the Gitea release.

It uses the run's own token and is left out of the status reported to
Gitea, so it cannot fail a release. With no Gitea release for the tag it
does nothing.
2026-09-30 06:52:24 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 031d028ba4 ci: drop the build cache from tag image builds
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (pull_request) Successful in 7m28s
GitHub scopes a run's Actions cache to its ref, so the cache a tag build
wrote could only ever be read by that same tag: the next release built cold
anyway. Each release also parked several GB of Rust layers in the
repository's 10 GB cache, enough to evict main's cargo cache and slow
everyday builds too. The image builds now run without a cache.
2026-09-30 06:44:41 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 6d7afc3c06 Merge pull request 'ci: run the github wait job on its own runner label' (#129) from ci/wait-runner into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Skipped
ci / build (push) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (push) Successful in 47m28s
2026-09-30 07:44:00 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 3d5a1692ab Merge pull request 'docs: point issues and discussions at Gitea and the forum' (#127) from docs/mirror-note into main
ci / build (push) Skipped
ci / fork-checks (push) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (push) Canceled after 33s
2026-09-30 07:43:27 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 1de77316f0 ci: run the github wait job on its own runner label
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (pull_request) Successful in 7m30s
The github job only polls Gitea for GitHub's commit status, but it holds a
runner slot for as long as the GitHub build takes -- the better part of an
hour for a cold build. On the shared build runners a handful of those
could take every slot and stall real work, so it now runs on the `wait`
label: a runner of its own, with many slots, no docker socket and a small
CPU and memory cap.
2026-09-30 00:36:20 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 26c7c6a897 Merge pull request 'ci: a cancelled GitHub run no longer reports failure to Gitea' (#128) from fix/ci-report-cancelled into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Skipped
ci / build (push) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (push) Canceled after 9m46s
2026-09-30 07:33:39 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 4ba1896eb1 ci: a cancelled GitHub run no longer reports failure to Gitea
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (pull_request) Successful in 6m5s
The mirror can push one commit twice in quick succession. GitHub then
starts two runs and cancels the older, and that run's report job posted
"failure" for the commit. Gitea's github job, seeing the newest status,
failed the check while the surviving run was still building and later
passed.

A cancelled run now posts nothing and leaves the result to the run that
superseded it. A real failure still reports failure.
2026-09-30 00:26:48 -07:00
jcoffey-dev b0e53ef966 docs: point issues and discussions at Gitea and the forum
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
ci / github (pull_request) Successful in 26m44s
This repository is now push-mirrored to GitHub, where issues and pull
requests would never reach the maintainers. A note under the title says
where development happens, and sends issues to git.coffeylabs.org and
discussions to community.coffeylabs.org.
2026-09-30 00:16:15 -07:00
jcoffey-dev dd57709522 Merge pull request 'ci: build on GitHub via the mirror, switchable with BUILD_ON' (#126) from ci/build-on-github into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 1m36s
ci / github (push) Skipped
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Skipped
ci / build (pull_request) Skipped
ci / github (pull_request) Canceled after 5m7s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 39m39s
github/ci (branch) GitHub Actions
Reviewed-on: #126
2026-09-30 06:52:16 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 3450c31345 Build on the GitHub mirror when BUILD_ON=github
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 7m46s
ci / github (pull_request) Skipped
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 2m4s
Gitea stays where the project lives and push-mirrors every branch and tag
to GitHub. With the Actions variable BUILD_ON set to 'github' on both
forges, the GitHub copy does the building and reports back to Gitea as a
commit status; unset, nothing changes and Gitea builds as before.

.github/workflows/ci.yml replaces the GitHub-era files. Branch pushes run
what Gitea's ci.yml checks (fork checks, dev build, test targets, the
release profile on main). v* tags run what publish.yml does, with the same
two guards: the image per architecture on native runners side by side,
the multi-arch index and :latest, the Gitea Release if the tag has none,
and the host-install binaries taken out of the image. A final job posts
"github/ci (branch)" or "github/ci (tag)" to the commit on Gitea.

On Gitea, the heavy jobs skip under BUILD_ON=github and a `github` job
waits for that status and passes or fails with it, so pull requests and
merges still look at a Gitea run. The weekly release, the upstream watch
and the announcement stay on Gitea.

Removed: cleanup.yml and publish.yml (GHCR), release.yml (a second weekly
schedule), and dependabot.yml, whose pull request branches every mirror
sync would delete.
2026-09-29 23:06:52 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 29d3a5f779 Merge pull request 'Release 2026.9.29.2' (#125) from release/2026.9.29.2-pr into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 48s
publish / version (push) Successful in 58s
ci / build (push) Successful in 29m10s
publish / publish-amd64 (push) Successful in 32m14s
publish / release (push) Successful in 9s
publish / publish-arm64 (push) Successful in 40m42s
publish / binaries (push) Successful in 51s
publish / announce (push) Successful in 22s
v2026.9.29.2
2026-09-29 17:27:07 +00:00
jcoffey-dev f1f112fc38 Release 2026.9.29.2
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 52s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 16m40s
2026-09-29 10:10:08 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 96be849976 Merge pull request 'Document why the client registration override is setup-only' (#124) from fix/client-override-recovery-only into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 34s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 22m54s
2026-09-29 17:04:07 +00:00
jcoffey-dev a5c8927dbc Merge pull request 'Take a token, never a password, outside DAV' (#122) from feature/http-basic-dav-only into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Canceled after 7s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 7s
2026-09-29 17:04:01 +00:00
jcoffey-dev ad09eeeefb Contract and end-to-end check for the client registration override
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 47s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 4m38s
Documents under C-5 why oAuthClientOverride counts only in bootstrap
and recovery mode, and adds tests/e2e/client_override.py: the
recovery administrator keeps the override in both modes; after setup,
an administrator gets no code for an unregistered client or a
redirect URI its client didn't register, and a device code approved
for an unregistered client can't be exchanged. The script fails
against a build without the change (3 of 8) and passes with it.
2026-09-29 09:46:31 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 7e06a3b1f6 Merge pull request 'Release 2026.9.29.1' (#123) from release/2026.9.29.1-pr into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 48s
publish / version (push) Successful in 11s
ci / build (push) Successful in 30m5s
publish / publish-amd64 (push) Successful in 32m52s
publish / release (push) Successful in 10s
publish / publish-arm64 (push) Successful in 43m6s
publish / binaries (push) Successful in 36s
publish / announce (push) Successful in 10s
v2026.9.29.1
2026-09-29 15:40:42 +00:00
jcoffey-dev e147206e82 Release 2026.9.29.1
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 50s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 13m48s
2026-09-29 08:25:13 -07:00
jcoffey-dev ca6484c356 Honor the client registration override only in setup and recovery
The recovery administrator signs in before any OAuth client is
registered, so it needs to skip the registration check. Outside
bootstrap and recovery mode, every account now signs in through a
registered client and one of its redirect URIs.
2026-09-29 08:25:13 -07:00
jcoffey-dev faf3d1e056 Take a token, never a password, outside DAV
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 17s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 7m41s
Anyone could host a copy of a front end on a server of their own,
collect a person's password there, and replay it as HTTP Basic against
JMAP or the API. Cross-origin rules don't stop that, since a server
isn't a browser, and neither does client registration, since Basic
never goes through OAuth (contract C-23).

JMAP (session, API, upload, download, event source, WebSocket), /api,
/auth/introspect, /auth/userinfo and authenticated /auth/register now
refuse an Authorization: Basic header before looking at the password,
with a 401 whose only challenge is Bearer. A wrong password gets the
same answer as the right one. CalDAV and CardDAV keep Basic, and their
401s still offer it. The sign-in page's /api/auth takes the password in
its body and is unaffected, as is the token endpoint's client
authentication.

Bootstrap and recovery mode accept Basic everywhere, as they keep
permissive CORS. INBUXA_HTTP_BASIC_AUTH=all puts it back everywhere;
dav is the default, and any other value logs a warning and keeps it.
Test builds accept Basic everywhere, since the integration suites sign
in with passwords, and legacy_protocols.py sets the variable.

Tested: unit tests for the paths, and tests/e2e/http_basic_auth.py
against the debug build, 26 checks, including both front ends' sign-in
path and a refused unregistered redirect.
2026-09-29 07:02:05 -07:00
jcoffey-dev ffcfde0b5a Merge pull request 'Release 2026.9.29' (#121) from release/2026.9.29-pr into main
publish / version (push) Successful in 11s
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 1m6s
ci / build (push) Successful in 32m20s
publish / publish-amd64 (push) Successful in 39m12s
publish / release (push) Successful in 5s
publish / publish-arm64 (push) Successful in 45m10s
publish / binaries (push) Successful in 41s
publish / announce (push) Successful in 22s
v2026.9.29
2026-09-29 05:43:53 +00:00
jcoffey-dev f1f05db790 Release 2026.9.29
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 46s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 4m19s
2026-09-28 22:38:59 -07:00
jcoffey-dev e1076a04b2 Merge pull request 'Journaling spec: built, and the console as built' (#120) from spec/journaling-built into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 32s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 19m51s
2026-09-29 05:23:58 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 8fc8d94bbc Merge pull request 'Journaling: a Journal link in Management › Compliance' (#119) from feature/journal-menu into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Canceled after 22s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 22s
2026-09-29 05:23:36 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 0c600a63fa Journaling spec: built, and the console as built
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 19s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 8m0s
2026-09-28 22:09:07 -07:00
jcoffey-dev f78925b316 Journaling: a Journal link in Management › Compliance
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 56s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 17m1s
The console's journal page (CustomComponent/Journal), after Data Loss
Prevention; the console shows it to those who may see journals.
2026-09-28 22:06:12 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 6ee7ba1b7e Merge pull request 'Logs: a total only when it's known, not the query cap' (#117) from fix/log-query-total into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 17s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 23m14s
2026-09-29 05:00:18 +00:00
jcoffey-dev a992caf810 Merge pull request 'Journaling: search, read and export over JMAP, and the chain check' (#118) from feature/journal-search into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 17s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 6m46s
2026-09-29 04:53:28 +00:00
jcoffey-dev daa486f7e7 Journaling: search, read and export over JMAP, and the chain check
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 16s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 8m0s
Phase 4 of the journaling spec.

- inbuxa:JournalEntry/query and /get (sysJournalSearch): filter by time,
  sender, recipient, either, direction, subject words, Message-ID and
  journal, newest first; the whole report only when asked for.
- inbuxa:JournalExport/set (sysJournalExport): a reason is required; a
  ZIP of the matching reports with manifest.csv, exceptions.csv and
  manifest.sha256, up to 10,000 reports and 1 GB.
- inbuxa:JournalVerification/set (sysJournalGet): chains and reports
  rechecked.
- Every search, listing, read, export and check is written to the audit
  log before anything is returned, with existing actions only.
- Catalog entries for the three objects; spec as-built notes.

journal_tests: administrators can't search; a Compliance Officer searches,
lists, reads a report, exports (reason required) and checks the chain;
the officer can't change journals; each of those is in the audit log.
2026-09-28 21:45:09 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 9c29fb2bea Logs: a total only when it's known, not the query cap
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 55s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 17m3s
2026-09-28 21:42:53 -07:00
jcoffey-dev abd5811420 Merge pull request 'Journaling: outside archives, and Journal it in mail flow rules' (#116) from feature/journal-archive into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 50s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 19m30s
2026-09-29 04:33:59 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 80051539d5 Merge pull request 'Security to-do list: accepted items, kept on the server' (#114) from feature/security-acceptances into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Canceled after 11s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 10s
2026-09-29 04:33:46 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 64550ebbd0 Journaling: outside archives, and Journal it in mail flow rules
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 1m19s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 5m44s
Phase 3 of the journaling spec.

- A journal's destination: builtIn (true for journals stored before) and
  archiveAddress, at least one. Reports to an archive are queued from the
  empty sender, one per address, flagged so they're never journaled.
- A pending record per report. When the queue lets go of one without
  delivering it (refused, expired, deleted), it becomes its own entry in
  the built-in journal under the sending journals' retention, the
  journal's archiveFailures (count, last time, reason) goes up, and the
  audit log records it; if that can't be written it stays queued.
- Journal it: a rule action naming a journal, on mail flow rules and
  beside a DLP rule's block, warn or hold. A journal whose scope chooses
  nobody takes only what rules send it.
- The report lists recipients a rule added or redirected to under
  "Added by rule", by rule name.
- A rule's route is cleared between messages in one SMTP session, with the
  new journal marks; a second message used to keep the first one's route.

tests/src/system/journal.rs: destination validation, a rule-only journal
fed by a rule that also adds a recipient, an unreachable archive's report
kept in the built-in journal with the failure counted, a report delivered
to an archive here and not journaled itself.
2026-09-28 21:27:44 -07:00
jcoffey-dev eea96e8674 Security to-do list: accepted items, kept on the server
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 19s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 8m5s
2026-09-28 21:22:43 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 4c5583e725 Merge pull request 'Journaling: capture at the queue, the built-in journal, retention' (#115) from feature/journal-capture into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 46s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 22m4s
2026-09-29 04:11:40 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 441ad0b18e Journaling: capture at the queue, the built-in journal, retention
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 41s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 8m2s
Phase 2 of the journaling spec.

- A copy of each message is taken in MessageWrapper::queue, after DLP and
  transport rules, for every enabled journal that takes it (direction and
  scope: everyone, or accounts, groups, domains, tenants). If the copy
  can't be taken the message isn't queued (temporary failure).
- The journal report: the envelope one field a line (sender, To, Cc, Bcc
  from the envelope, list members from their ORCPT, direction, held for
  review), then the queued message byte for byte as message/rfc822.
- The built-in journal under J in the inbuxa subspace: one chain per node
  whose links name each entry by SHA-256, so entries can expire out of
  chain order; purge leaves a marker, and verify catches an entry changed
  or removed early and a report that doesn't match.
- Retention per journal (30 to 3650 days); an entry keeps what it was
  written with. The daily maintenance purges what's due, keeping entries
  whose people a legal hold covers (deleted accounts a hold keeps too),
  and records the counts in the audit log.
- inbuxa:Journal get/set, audited by the request layer. Permissions
  680-683: administrators see and change journals; the Compliance Officer
  sees, searches and exports. Whoever changes journals may grant search and
  export without holding them, so officers can still be appointed.
- Catalog entries (inbuxa:Journal, source "journal"); spec as-built notes.

tests/src/system/journal.rs: validation, internal mail with a Bcc,
outgoing into two journals, incoming over LMTP, the report and its
original, tamper and early removal caught, hold-aware purge, retention
changes leave entries alone, disabled and removed journals take nothing.
2026-09-28 20:46:04 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 792ff9d1ee Merge pull request 'Spec: journaling' (#113) from spec/journaling into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 48s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 54m15s
2026-09-29 03:17:22 +00:00
jcoffey-dev af49e94d97 Journaling spec: approved, with the answers
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 32s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 3m56s
2026-09-28 20:13:15 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 37c00b609c Spec: journaling
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 47s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 23m6s
2026-09-28 19:45:37 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 94a3a762b0 Merge pull request 'Mail rules: group and tenant ids in their JMAP form' (#112) from feature/rule-ids-as-jmap-ids into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 17s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 40m32s
2026-09-29 02:36:50 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 9a7d678532 Merge pull request 'DLP: how long held mail waits is a setting' (#111) from feature/dlp-hold-days into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 14s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 4m36s
2026-09-29 02:32:12 +00:00
jcoffey-dev 823d42d528 Mail rules: group and tenant ids in their JMAP form
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 2m26s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 5m47s
senderGroup, senderTenant and recipientGroup conditions now read and write group and tenant ids as JMAP ids ("b", "c"…), like legal hold scopes and the rest of the API, so the console can use its object pickers; plain numbers are still read. Held as numbers for matching. Unit test for both forms and a bad id; mail_rules_tests round-trips a tenant condition over JMAP.
2026-09-28 19:30:28 -07:00
jcoffey-dev de514115dd DLP: how long held mail waits is a setting
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 51s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 4m32s
inbuxa:DlpSettings (singleton, urn:inbuxa:jmap): keepHeldDays, 1 to 90,
7 by default (settled answer 5 made it a setting). sysDlpPolicyGet reads
it, sysDlpPolicyUpdate changes it, server-level, audited by the request
layer. Each held message keeps the days it was given, and the sender's
notices say that number. Privacy catalog entry; spec §2.6 updated.

mail_rules_tests: 7 by default, 0 refused, 3 set and a message held
afterwards expires 3 days after it was held, the expiry notice says 3.
2026-09-28 19:27:27 -07:00
jcoffey-dev 0f8816f659 Merge pull request 'Submissions say when DLP held the message' (#110) from feature/submission-held-flag into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 1m11s
ci / build (push) Successful in 30m38s
2026-09-29 01:54:00 +00:00
jcoffey-dev b59eebf1e7 Submissions say when DLP held the message
ci / fork-checks (pull_request) Successful in 44s
ci / build (pull_request) Successful in 4m44s
An EmailSubmission create's response carries inbuxa:held (dlp-and-mail-flow-rules spec, §2.6, §4): true when the message is held for review, false otherwise, so the webmail can say so at once. A sender can't read the review queue, and a held message's sendAt is its real send time, not the century-off release, so this is how the sender learns. mail_rules_tests checks both values.
2026-09-28 18:48:39 -07:00
jcoffey-dev f4061f542c Merge pull request 'Menus: Held Mail, Data Loss Prevention and Mail Flow Rules' (#109) from feature/dlp-console-nav into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 55s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 5m54s
2026-09-29 01:48:07 +00:00
jcoffey-dev e99f84bd01 Merge pull request 'DLP phase 3: hold for review' (#108) from feature/dlp-hold into main
ci / fork-checks (push) Successful in 19s
ci / build (push) Canceled after 4m22s
2026-09-29 01:43:44 +00:00