Repository navigation
Recaptcha enterprise - #46
Open
SupraSummus wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
SupraSummus wants to merge 4 commits into
SupraSummus wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
Closes llybin#11. Verify tokens by creating an assessment with the reCAPTCHA Enterprise API instead of the siteverify endpoint. The request is authenticated with a Google Cloud API key passed in the query string, so no extra dependency is needed. - `ReCaptchaEnterpriseField` reuses the score resolution and the secret key priority of the other fields, the secret key holds the API key. - The project id and the site key come from the new settings `DRF_RECAPTCHA_ENTERPRISE_PROJECT_ID` and `DRF_RECAPTCHA_ENTERPRISE_SITE_KEY` or from the field arguments, the endpoint from `DRF_RECAPTCHA_ENTERPRISE_DOMAIN`. - `action` is optional, checkbox site keys are not bound to an action, so the expected action is only sent and checked when it is defined. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019FoKGHdiqxUogdQVtUyAd1
A field was built out of settings, so a project deploying without a credential could not start at all: `ReCaptchaEnterpriseField` raised `ImproperlyConfigured` for a blank project id or site key while the serializer module was still importing, and the system check raised Error on a blank secret key, which fails every management command that runs checks, `migrate` in a release phase included. With no id on that message `SILENCED_SYSTEM_CHECKS` could not reach it either, leaving no way to deploy without credentials but to feed the settings a placeholder that verifies nothing, and then keep it out of an HTTP request by hand. Credentials are read when a field validates instead. - A deployment missing one starts, and serves everything the captcha does not guard. The fields refuse the submissions they protect, because the alternative is accepting tokens nobody verified, and log which setting is missing while telling the submitter only that their token was not checked. - The check reports the same settings at startup as a warning carrying an id. Enterprise's project id and site key had no startup validation at all before, only the crash on import; defining either of them is what asks for them, even when defined empty, because that is what a deployment reading unset environment variables ends up with and the case worth reporting. - Building a field touches no setting, so nothing captures a credential before settings finish loading, and `override_settings` reaches a field declared at import time. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01C7MCFZaqitJWX2XeG3igST
The Ruff workflow installs the latest ruff, which now flags rules the pinned 0.13.0 dev dependency did not: PLR0917 on the six-argument submit_enterprise, ISC004 on the implicitly concatenated error strings in the validator parametrize tables, and Python code blocks inside README.md, which ruff format now reformats. submit_enterprise becomes keyword-only rather than carrying another noqa: every call site already passes keywords, and the function is new in the unreleased Enterprise work, so nothing external can be calling it positionally. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0171yDhL8wgvM4sr71n4iFXS
`HTTPError` was caught and logged with `logger.exception` and no body, so every rejected verification request reported as `HTTP Error 400: Bad Request` and the reason was discarded at the one point it was still readable — `HTTPError` is a file object, and nothing downstream can go back for it. The Enterprise API makes that expensive. It answers a site key belonging to another project, a project the API key cannot use, and an API nobody enabled with the same status line, naming the difference only in the body: the first is a bad paste, the second a key from the wrong project, the third a console setting, and the alert distinguished none of them. The submitter's message is unchanged — whose configuration is wrong is not theirs to know, and a retry may well work. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0181nt4yaQqya1hGzxWnxGDu
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
#11