mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-19 20:44:16 +02:00
514d8738cf
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Rejected agent JWTs whose run header disagrees with the signed claim are audited into `activity_log` so operators can see spoof attempts > - The audit insert writes the claimed run id into `run_id`, which is a real foreign key to `heartbeat_runs`; a bogus claim violates the FK and the catch swallows it, so the audit row is silently lost exactly when it matters most > - This pull request verifies the claimed run exists before trusting it into the FK column; the claim itself stays in `entityId` and `details` > - The benefit is a reliable audit trail for rejected credentials ## Linked Issues or Issue Description Refs #10498 — the anonymous fall-through half was fixed on master already (every failed-credential branch now returns an explicit 401/403/422); this closes the residual FK-swallowed audit defect. ## What Changed - `server/src/middleware/auth.ts`: `auditAgentJwtRunHeaderMismatch` looks up the claimed run id and populates `runId` only when the row exists; `entityId` and `details.claimRunId` carry the claim either way. - `server/src/__tests__/agent-auth-middleware.test.ts`: a mismatch whose claimed run does not exist still produces the audit row with `runId` omitted. ## Verification - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server vitest run src/__tests__/agent-auth-middleware.test.ts` — 17 tests pass. - Before: a run-header mismatch whose claimed run id was absent from `heartbeat_runs` violated the `activity_log.run_id` FK, and the catch swallowed it — no audit row. After: the row lands with `runId` null and the claim preserved in `entityId`/`details`. ## Risks - Low risk. One extra indexed select on a rare rejection path; the audit payload is unchanged apart from `runId` now being conditional on existence. ## Model Used - Anthropic Claude — SWE-2 Max agent via Devin CLI, tool use and code execution. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge Co-authored-by: Waseem Ilyas <1478353+Waseemilyas@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>