Files
SeedPass/js/packages/cli/test/tokens.test.ts
T
thePR0M3TH3ANandClaude Opus 5 8653ee8006 fix(agent): validate put at the daemon boundary; state the two scope semantics (L-5, L-6, L-7)
L-7 — `put` is the only way a fingerprint enters `held`, and every later
handler joins that string onto a path (the vault it opens, the audit log it
writes). The CLI validated the format first, which is exactly why the daemon
could not rely on it: agent.ts's own header says the CLI is untrusted, and the
browser extension speaks this protocol next. `put` now requires 16 uppercase
hex, and additionally that the fingerprint actually belongs to the supplied
seed — a mismatch would unlock a vault the caller did not name and file its
audit records under the wrong profile.

Validation order matters and is now deliberate: cheap format check, then ttl,
then the seed match last, because deriving a fingerprint runs the BIP-39 KDF
and a malformed ttl should not pay for it. This keeps the existing
non-numeric-ttl test exercising the ttl path rather than short-circuiting on
the new check.

L-5 — `label_regex` is unanchored, so a token issued for `prod` also reaches
`not-prod-db`. Left as-is on purpose: Python matches with `re.search`, so
anchoring the TypeScript side alone would make one token mean two different
things depending on which implementation holds it, and would silently narrow
every token already issued. The audit asked for whichever behavior Python has,
documented and in the parity matrix — so the semantics are now stated in
--label-regex help, reported machine-readably as
capabilities().tokens.label_regex_semantics, explained at the enforcement
point, recorded in the compatibility matrix, and pinned by tests that assert
BOTH labels are visible to an unanchored token.

L-6 — the exec allowlist constrains the command word, never its arguments.
The token holder writes the argv and the child gets the secret in its
environment, so an allowlisted binary with an output-file or network flag
hands the secret straight back. Documented in the same three places rather
than changed: argument-level containment means allowlisting full argv
templates instead of command words, which is a token-format change that has to
land in both implementations together.

Tests: malformed and mismatched fingerprints refused with nothing held (path
traversal, wrong case, wrong length, trailing component); unanchored vs
anchored label_regex; capabilities reporting both semantics. Mutation-verified
— disabling either put guard turns the matching tests red.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Vtx94nXDmNgXEeThUZP4QN
2026-08-18 21:54:21 -04:00

266 lines
11 KiB
TypeScript

/**
* Scoped-token enforcement tests: a token-holding process with NO mnemonic
* anywhere in its environment gets exactly what its scopes grant — reads,
* sink deliveries for permitted kinds/labels, nothing else — with every
* decision landing in the tamper-evident audit log.
*/
import { afterAll, beforeAll, describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
import { mkdtemp, readFile, writeFile, appendFile } from "node:fs/promises";
import { tmpdir } from "node:os";
import { join } from "node:path";
import process from "node:process";
import { mnemonics } from "@seedpass/test-vectors";
import { generateFingerprint } from "@seedpass/core";
import { buildProgram, AgentDaemon, agentSocketPath, type ProgramIo } from "../src/index.js";
const MNEMONIC = mnemonics["abandon12"]!;
const FINGERPRINT = generateFingerprint(MNEMONIC);
const PASSWORD = "token-test-pw";
let appDir: string;
let daemon: AgentDaemon;
let token: string;
async function run(
env: Record<string, string | undefined>,
...argv: string[]
): Promise<{ stdout: string; error?: unknown }> {
const saved: Record<string, string | undefined> = {};
for (const [k, v] of Object.entries(env)) {
saved[k] = process.env[k];
if (v === undefined) delete process.env[k];
else process.env[k] = v;
}
const out: string[] = [];
const io: ProgramIo = { out: (l: string) => out.push(l), err: () => {} };
let error: unknown;
try {
await buildProgram(io).parseAsync(["node", "seedpass-js", "--app-dir", appDir, ...argv]);
} catch (e) {
error = e;
} finally {
for (const [k, v] of Object.entries(saved)) {
if (v === undefined) delete process.env[k];
else process.env[k] = v;
}
}
return { stdout: out.join("\n"), error };
}
const asOwner = { SEEDPASS_MNEMONIC: MNEMONIC };
const asTokenHolder = (t: string) => ({
SEEDPASS_MNEMONIC: undefined,
SEEDPASS_TOKEN: t,
});
beforeAll(async () => {
appDir = await mkdtemp(join(tmpdir(), "seedpass-tokens-"));
process.env["SEEDPASS_AGENT_SOCK"] = join(appDir, "agent.sock");
daemon = new AgentDaemon(agentSocketPath(appDir), 900, appDir);
await daemon.start();
await run({ ...asOwner, SEEDPASS_PASSWORD: PASSWORD }, "fingerprint", "add");
await run(asOwner, "entry", "add", "key-value", "api-token", "k", "sinkable-secret");
await run(asOwner, "entry", "add", "key-value", "internal-db", "k", "off-limits");
await run(asOwner, "entry", "add", "password", "site-login", "--length", "16");
await run({ SEEDPASS_MNEMONIC: undefined, SEEDPASS_PASSWORD: PASSWORD }, "vault", "unlock");
});
afterAll(async () => {
await daemon.stop();
delete process.env["SEEDPASS_AGENT_SOCK"];
});
describe("token issuance", () => {
it("issues a scoped token, printed exactly once", async () => {
const r = await run(
{},
"agent", "token-issue",
"--name", "deploy-bot",
"--scope", "read", "use",
"--kind", "key_value",
"--label-regex", "^api-",
"--ttl", "600",
"--uses", "2",
);
const issued = JSON.parse(r.stdout);
token = issued.token;
expect(token.length).toBeGreaterThan(20);
expect(issued.record.scopes).toEqual(["read", "use"]);
expect(issued.record).not.toHaveProperty("secret_hash");
const list = JSON.parse((await run({}, "agent", "token-list")).stdout);
expect(list[0].name).toBe("deploy-bot");
expect(JSON.stringify(list)).not.toContain(token);
});
});
/**
* `label_regex` is a search, not a full match — in both implementations.
* Python enforces it with `re.search` (cli/agent.py), so anchoring on the TS
* side would mean the same token grants different access depending on which
* implementation holds it, and would silently narrow every token already
* issued. These tests pin the semantics so the surprise stays documented
* rather than becoming an accidental behavior change later.
*/
describe("label_regex matches anywhere, matching Python's re.search", () => {
it("an unanchored pattern reaches labels that merely contain it", async () => {
await run(asOwner, "entry", "add", "key-value", "not-prod-db", "k", "adjacent-secret");
await run(asOwner, "entry", "add", "key-value", "prod", "k", "intended-secret");
const issued = JSON.parse(
(await run(
{},
"agent", "token-issue",
"--name", "substring-demo",
"--scope", "read",
"--kind", "key_value",
"--label-regex", "prod",
"--ttl", "600",
)).stdout,
);
const rows = JSON.parse(
(await run(asTokenHolder(issued.token), "entry", "list")).stdout,
) as { label: string }[];
// The point of the test: BOTH are visible, not just the exact match.
expect(rows.map((x) => x.label).sort()).toEqual(["not-prod-db", "prod"]);
});
it("anchoring the pattern is how an operator gets an exact match", async () => {
const issued = JSON.parse(
(await run(
{},
"agent", "token-issue",
"--name", "anchored-demo",
"--scope", "read",
"--kind", "key_value",
"--label-regex", "^prod$",
"--ttl", "600",
)).stdout,
);
const rows = JSON.parse(
(await run(asTokenHolder(issued.token), "entry", "list")).stdout,
) as { label: string }[];
expect(rows.map((x) => x.label)).toEqual(["prod"]);
});
it("reports the semantics in capabilities so automation can scope correctly", async () => {
const caps = JSON.parse((await run({}, "capabilities")).stdout);
expect(caps.tokens.label_regex_semantics).toContain("search");
expect(caps.tokens.label_regex_semantics).toContain("^...$");
// The exec allowlist's containment is likewise narrower than it reads:
// it names a binary, not what that binary may be asked to do.
expect(caps.tokens.exec_allowlist_semantics).toContain("command word only");
});
it("an uncompilable pattern denies rather than throwing", async () => {
const issued = JSON.parse(
(await run(
{},
"agent", "token-issue",
"--name", "bad-regex",
"--scope", "read",
"--label-regex", "([unclosed",
"--ttl", "600",
)).stdout,
);
const rows = JSON.parse(
(await run(asTokenHolder(issued.token), "entry", "list")).stdout,
) as { label: string }[];
expect(rows).toEqual([]);
});
});
describe("token-mode access (no mnemonic anywhere)", () => {
it("lists only the entries the token may act on, with no secret values", async () => {
const r = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "entry", "list");
const rows = JSON.parse(r.stdout) as { label: string }[];
// Scoped to kind key_value and labels matching ^api-, so the password
// entry and the non-matching key_value are not even disclosed.
expect(rows.map((x) => x.label)).toEqual(["api-token"]);
expect(r.stdout).not.toContain("sinkable-secret");
expect(r.stdout).not.toContain("off-limits");
});
it("delivers a permitted secret to a sink", async () => {
const dir = await mkdtemp(join(tmpdir(), "seedpass-tok-sink-"));
const capture = join(dir, "captured.txt");
const script = join(dir, "cap.sh");
await writeFile(script, `#!/bin/sh\nprintf '%s' "$SEEDPASS_SECRET" > "${capture}"\n`, {
mode: 0o755,
});
const r = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "use", "api-token", "--exec", script);
expect(JSON.parse(r.stdout).exitCode).toBe(0);
expect(await readFile(capture, "utf8")).toBe("sinkable-secret");
expect(r.stdout).not.toContain("sinkable-secret");
});
it("denies reveal (scope), wrong kind, and non-matching label", async () => {
const reveal = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "entry", "reveal", "api-token");
expect(String((reveal.error as Error).message)).toContain("scope 'reveal' not granted");
// Entries outside the token's constraints are not resolvable at all —
// the agent never returned them, so their existence is not disclosed.
const wrongKind = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "use", "site-login", "--stdin-to", "cat");
expect(String((wrongKind.error as Error).message)).toContain("no entry matches");
const wrongLabel = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "use", "internal-db", "--stdin-to", "cat");
expect(String((wrongLabel.error as Error).message)).toContain("no entry matches");
// Addressing a forbidden entry by id still fails, in the agent
const byId = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "use", "sp://entry/2", "--stdin-to", "cat");
expect(String((byId.error as Error).message)).toMatch(/no entry|denied/);
});
it("exhausts after the allotted uses", async () => {
// Use #2 of 2 (use #1 was the sink delivery above; denials don't consume)
const second = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "use", "api-token", "--stdin-to", "cat");
expect(second.error).toBeUndefined();
const third = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "use", "api-token", "--stdin-to", "cat");
expect(String((third.error as Error).message)).toContain("token exhausted");
});
it("revocation cuts off reads too", async () => {
const list = JSON.parse((await run({}, "agent", "token-list")).stdout);
await run({}, "agent", "token-revoke", list[0].id);
const denied = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "entry", "list");
expect(String((denied.error as Error).message)).toContain("token revoked");
});
it("token mode cannot provision or modify", async () => {
const r = await run(asTokenHolder(token), "entry", "add", "key-value", "x", "k", "v");
expect(r.error).toBeTruthy();
});
});
describe("audit chain", () => {
it("recorded the whole story and verifies", async () => {
const r = await run(asOwner, "agent", "audit-verify");
const summary = JSON.parse(r.stdout);
expect(summary.verified).toBe(true);
expect(summary.records).toBeGreaterThanOrEqual(6);
const tail = JSON.parse((await run(asOwner, "agent", "audit-tail", "-n", "50")).stdout) as {
event: string;
details: Record<string, unknown>;
}[];
const events = tail.map((r) => r.event);
expect(events).toContain("token_issued");
expect(events).toContain("secret_delivered");
expect(events).toContain("access_denied");
expect(events).toContain("token_revoked");
const denial = tail.find((r) => r.event === "access_denied")!;
expect(String(denial.details["reason"])).toBeTruthy();
// Secrets never appear in the audit log
expect(JSON.stringify(tail)).not.toContain("sinkable-secret");
});
it("detects tampering", async () => {
const path = join(appDir, FINGERPRINT, "audit.log");
await appendFile(path, JSON.stringify({ timestamp: "x", event: "forged", details: {}, sig: "00" }) + "\n");
const r = await run(asOwner, "agent", "audit-verify");
expect(String((r.error as Error).message)).toContain("audit chain broken");
});
});