Skip to content

feat(authz): protovalidate tests for new authz obligations fields #2747

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 19, 2025
Merged

feat(authz): protovalidate tests for new authz obligations fields #2747

merged 4 commits into from
Sep 19, 2025

Conversation

@jakedoublev
Copy link
Contributor

Proposed Changes

  • bumps protocol/go to latest release
  • adds protovalidate tests to obligation FQNs in authz protos

Checklist

  • I have added or updated unit tests
  • I have added or updated integration tests (if appropriate)
  • I have added or updated documentation

Testing Instructions

@jakedoublev jakedoublev requested review from a team as code owners September 18, 2025 21:22
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @jakedoublev, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the authorization service by introducing robust validation for obligation Fully Qualified Names (FQNs) within authorization requests. It includes an update to the protocol/go dependency and adds comprehensive protovalidate tests to ensure that FulfillableObligationFqns adhere to defined constraints, preventing malformed or excessive obligation lists from being processed.

Highlights

  • Protocol/Go Version Bump: The protocol/go dependency has been updated from v0.10.0 to v0.11.0, bringing in the latest changes from the protocol definitions.
  • New Protovalidate Tests for Obligations: Comprehensive protovalidate tests have been added to validate the FulfillableObligationFqns field in authorization requests. These tests cover scenarios such as exceeding the maximum number of obligations and providing invalid FQN formats.
  • Helper Functions for Obligation FQNs: Several new helper functions (getRandomValidObligationValueFQNsList, getTooManyObligations, randString, getRandomObligationValueFQN) were introduced to facilitate the generation of valid and invalid obligation FQNs for testing purposes.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Obligations checked, Valid paths now clearly seen, Code stands strong and true.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

gemini-code-assist[bot]
gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Sep 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request introduces protovalidate tests for the new FulfillableObligationFqns field in authorization requests and bumps the protocol/go dependency to include these new fields. The changes are well-structured and improve test coverage for the new validation rules.

My review includes a few suggestions to improve the new tests:

  • Strengthen failure test cases by specifying the expected validation error.
  • Avoid mutating global test data to prevent potential flakiness.
  • Enhance random test data generation to cover boundary conditions.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Benchmark results, click to expand

Benchmark authorization.GetDecisions Results:

Metric Value
Approved Decision Requests 1000
Denied Decision Requests 0
Total Time 177.146825ms

Benchmark authorization.v2.GetMultiResourceDecision Results:

Metric Value
Approved Decision Requests 1000
Denied Decision Requests 0
Total Time 90.269418ms

Standard Benchmark Metrics Skipped or Failed

Bulk Benchmark Results

Metric Value
Total Decrypts 100
Successful Decrypts 100
Failed Decrypts 0
Total Time 344.382019ms
Throughput 290.38 requests/second

TDF3 Benchmark Results:

Metric Value
Total Requests 5000
Successful Requests 5000
Failed Requests 0
Concurrent Requests 50
Total Time 37.048516189s
Average Latency 368.630943ms
Throughput 134.96 requests/second

NANOTDF Benchmark Results:

Metric Value
Total Requests 5000
Successful Requests 5000
Failed Requests 0
Concurrent Requests 50
Total Time 26.583237117s
Average Latency 264.653819ms
Throughput 188.09 requests/second

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Benchmark results, click to expand

Benchmark authorization.GetDecisions Results:

Metric Value
Approved Decision Requests 1000
Denied Decision Requests 0
Total Time 179.68981ms

Benchmark authorization.v2.GetMultiResourceDecision Results:

Metric Value
Approved Decision Requests 1000
Denied Decision Requests 0
Total Time 102.581388ms

Standard Benchmark Metrics Skipped or Failed

Bulk Benchmark Results

Metric Value
Total Decrypts 100
Successful Decrypts 100
Failed Decrypts 0
Total Time 352.214515ms
Throughput 283.92 requests/second

TDF3 Benchmark Results:

Metric Value
Total Requests 5000
Successful Requests 5000
Failed Requests 0
Concurrent Requests 50
Total Time 36.69178745s
Average Latency 364.845284ms
Throughput 136.27 requests/second

NANOTDF Benchmark Results:

Metric Value
Total Requests 5000
Successful Requests 5000
Failed Requests 0
Concurrent Requests 50
Total Time 26.206105435s
Average Latency 261.02645ms
Throughput 190.80 requests/second

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Benchmark results, click to expand

Benchmark authorization.GetDecisions Results:

Metric Value
Approved Decision Requests 1000
Denied Decision Requests 0
Total Time 169.747765ms

Benchmark authorization.v2.GetMultiResourceDecision Results:

Metric Value
Approved Decision Requests 1000
Denied Decision Requests 0
Total Time 86.990628ms

Standard Benchmark Metrics Skipped or Failed

Bulk Benchmark Results

Metric Value
Total Decrypts 100
Successful Decrypts 100
Failed Decrypts 0
Total Time 347.430906ms
Throughput 287.83 requests/second

TDF3 Benchmark Results:

Metric Value
Total Requests 5000
Successful Requests 5000
Failed Requests 0
Concurrent Requests 50
Total Time 36.404192628s
Average Latency 362.479552ms
Throughput 137.35 requests/second

NANOTDF Benchmark Results:

Metric Value
Total Requests 5000
Successful Requests 5000
Failed Requests 0
Concurrent Requests 50
Total Time 25.323654463s
Average Latency 252.153103ms
Throughput 197.44 requests/second

@jakedoublev jakedoublev added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 19, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 73e6319 Sep 19, 2025
32 checks passed
@jakedoublev jakedoublev deleted the feat/DSPX-1355 branch September 19, 2025 14:43
@opentdf-automation opentdf-automation bot mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2025
Merged
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 22, 2025
@opentdf-automation
chore(main): release service 0.11.0 (#2744)
e353b0b 
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop*
---


##
[0.11.0](service/v0.10.0...service/v0.11.0)
(2025-10-22)


### Features

* **authz:** add obligation fulfillment logic to obligation PDP
([#2740](#2740))
([2f8d30d](2f8d30d))
* **authz:** audit logs should properly handle obligations
([#2824](#2824))
([874ec7b](874ec7b))
* **authz:** defer to request auth as decision/entitlements entity
([#2789](#2789))
([feb34d8](feb34d8))
* **authz:** obligations protos within auth service
([#2745](#2745))
([41ee5a8](41ee5a8))
* **authz:** protovalidate tests for new authz obligations fields
([#2747](#2747))
([73e6319](73e6319))
* **authz:** service logic to use request auth as entity identifier in
PDP decisions/entitlements
([#2790](#2790))
([6784e88](6784e88))
* **authz:** wire up obligations enforcement in auth service
([#2756](#2756))
([11b3ea9](11b3ea9))
* **core:** propagate token clientID on configured claim via interceptor
into shared context metadata
([#2760](#2760))
([0f77246](0f77246))
* **kas:** Add required obligations to kao metadata.:
([#2806](#2806))
([16fb26c](16fb26c))
* **policy:** add FQNs to obligation defs + vals
([#2749](#2749))
([fa2585c](fa2585c))
* **policy:** Add obligation support to KAS
([#2786](#2786))
([bb1bca0](bb1bca0))
* **policy:** List obligation triggers rpc
([#2823](#2823))
([206abe3](206abe3))
* **policy:** namespace root certificates
([#2771](#2771))
([beaff21](beaff21))
* **policy:** Proto - root certificates by namespace
([#2800](#2800))
([0edb359](0edb359))
* **policy:** Protos List obligation triggers
([#2803](#2803))
([b32df81](b32df81))
* **policy:** Return built obligations fqns with triggers.
([#2830](#2830))
([e843018](e843018))
* **policy:** Return obligations from GetAttributeValue calls
([#2742](#2742))
([aa9b393](aa9b393))


### Bug Fixes

* **core:** CORS
([#2787](#2787))
([a030ac6](a030ac6))
* **core:** deprecate policy WithValue selector not utilized by RPC
([#2794](#2794))
([c573595](c573595))
* **core:** deprecated stale protos and add better upgrade comments
([#2793](#2793))
([f2678cc](f2678cc))
* **core:** Don't require known manager names
([#2792](#2792))
([8a56a96](8a56a96))
* **core:** Fix mode negation and core mode
([#2779](#2779))
([de9807d](de9807d))
* **core:** resolve environment loading issues
([#2827](#2827))
([9af3184](9af3184))
* **deps:** bump github.com/opentdf/platform/lib/ocrypto from 0.6.0 to
0.7.0 in /service
([#2812](#2812))
([a6d180d](a6d180d))
* **deps:** bump github.com/opentdf/platform/protocol/go from 0.12.0 to
0.13.0 in /service
([#2814](#2814))
([5e9c695](5e9c695))
* **deps:** bump github.com/opentdf/platform/sdk from 0.7.0 to 0.9.0 in
/service ([#2798](#2798))
([d6bc9a8](d6bc9a8))
* **deps:** bump github.com/opentdf/platform/sdk from 0.9.0 to 0.10.0 in
/service ([#2831](#2831))
([412dfd1](412dfd1))
* ECC key loading (deprecated)
([#2757](#2757))
([49990eb](49990eb))
* **policy:** Change to nil
([#2746](#2746))
([a449434](a449434))

---
This PR was generated with [Release
Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See
[documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).

Co-authored-by: opentdf-automation[bot] <149537512+opentdf-automation[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@alkalescent alkalescent alkalescent approved these changes

@c-r33d c-r33d c-r33d approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist[bot] gemini-code-assist[bot] left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

comp:authorization size/xs

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@jakedoublev @alkalescent @c-r33d