mirror of
https://github.com/duckietm/Nitro-V3.git
synced 2026-06-19 15:06:20 +00:00
fix(hooks): useHasPermission must distinguish ALLOWED from ROOM_OWNER
The permission map shipped over the wire carries both
PermissionSetting.ALLOWED (value 1) and PermissionSetting.ROOM_OWNER
(value 2). Server-side, `Habbo.hasPermission(key)` calls
`Rank.hasPermission(key, isRoomOwner=false)`, whose implementation
at Rank.java:120 is:
setting == ALLOWED || (setting == ROOM_OWNER && isRoomOwner)
So a permission whose rank value is ROOM_OWNER is only granted when
the caller is the active room owner — Habbo.hasPermission(key) with
the default `false` therefore returns false for ROOM_OWNER entries.
The previous useHasPermission implementation (`> 0`) treated
ROOM_OWNER as unconditionally true, which would let a UI gate light
up even when the server would refuse the action. Real example from
the default seed: `acc_closedice_room` is ROOM_OWNER for rank_1..6
and ALLOWED only for rank_7 — under `> 0` the predicate was true for
every rank, diverging from the server behaviour.
Tighten useHasPermission to `=== 1` (ALLOWED only). For the genuine
"this is a ROOM_OWNER permission, combine with room session"
scenarios, code reaches for usePermissionValue(key) and checks
`=== 2 && roomSession.isRoomOwner` explicitly.
None of the 11 migrated consumers are affected by the tightening:
the keys they use (acc_supporttool / acc_anyroomowner /
acc_catalogfurni / acc_calendar_force / acc_staff_pick /
acc_ambassador) are all ALLOWED-only in the default seed.
Test refresh:
- useHasPermission('acc_supporttool') (value 1) stays true.
- useHasPermission('acc_anyroomowner') with value 2 in the mock
flips from true to false — the new contract.
- Other cases unchanged.
Verification: yarn typecheck clean, yarn lint:hooks clean, yarn test
214/214.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -214,16 +214,25 @@ describe('useHasPermission + usePermissionValue + useUserPermissions', () =>
|
||||
});
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
it('useHasPermission returns true for any non-zero value, false for absent/zero', () =>
|
||||
it('useHasPermission returns true only for ALLOWED (value 1), false for ROOM_OWNER/absent/zero', () =>
|
||||
{
|
||||
permissionsSnapshot = new Map([
|
||||
[ 'acc_supporttool', 1 ],
|
||||
[ 'acc_anyroomowner', 2 ],
|
||||
[ 'acc_closedice_room', 0 ]
|
||||
[ 'acc_supporttool', 1 ], // ALLOWED
|
||||
[ 'acc_anyroomowner', 2 ], // ROOM_OWNER — requires room ownership at call time
|
||||
[ 'acc_closedice_room', 0 ] // DISALLOWED (shouldn't reach the client, but defensive)
|
||||
]);
|
||||
|
||||
// ALLOWED → true. Matches Habbo.hasPermission(key) which calls
|
||||
// Rank.hasPermission(key, false) → only ALLOWED short-circuits.
|
||||
expect(renderHook(() => useHasPermission('acc_supporttool')).result.current).toBe(true);
|
||||
expect(renderHook(() => useHasPermission('acc_anyroomowner')).result.current).toBe(true);
|
||||
|
||||
// ROOM_OWNER → false. The server-side check requires the
|
||||
// caller to pass isRoomOwner=true, which the client doesn't
|
||||
// have ambiently. Code that needs to combine this with the
|
||||
// active room session should call usePermissionValue(key) and
|
||||
// check === 2 alongside roomSession.isRoomOwner.
|
||||
expect(renderHook(() => useHasPermission('acc_anyroomowner')).result.current).toBe(false);
|
||||
|
||||
expect(renderHook(() => useHasPermission('acc_closedice_room')).result.current).toBe(false);
|
||||
expect(renderHook(() => useHasPermission('acc_unknown_key')).result.current).toBe(false);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -192,24 +192,39 @@ export const useUserPermissions = (): ReadonlyMap<string, number> =>
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Reactive predicate: does the current user have the named
|
||||
* permission (ALLOWED or ROOM_OWNER)? `key` must match a row in
|
||||
* `permission_definitions.permission_key` (e.g. `'acc_supporttool'`,
|
||||
* `'acc_anyroomowner'`, `'acc_catalogfurni'`). Prefer this over any
|
||||
* rank-based gate — it survives rank renumbering and adding new
|
||||
* ranks without touching the React code.
|
||||
* permission **unconditionally** (ALLOWED only)? `key` must match a
|
||||
* row in `permission_definitions.permission_key` (e.g.
|
||||
* `'acc_supporttool'`, `'acc_anyroomowner'`, `'acc_catalogfurni'`).
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Mirrors the server-side semantics of `Habbo.hasPermission(key)`
|
||||
* (PermissionsManager → `Rank.hasPermission(key, isRoomOwner=false)`
|
||||
* which returns `setting == ALLOWED` — `setting == ROOM_OWNER`
|
||||
* requires the call site to pass `isRoomOwner=true`, which the
|
||||
* client doesn't have ambiently). So this hook returns `true`
|
||||
* only for ALLOWED (value 1) and `false` for ROOM_OWNER (value 2)
|
||||
* — the latter has to be re-checked against the active room
|
||||
* ownership via `usePermissionValue(key) === 2 && roomSession.isRoomOwner`.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Prefer this over any rank-based gate — it survives rank
|
||||
* renumbering and adding new ranks without touching the React code.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
export const useHasPermission = (key: string): boolean =>
|
||||
{
|
||||
const permissions = useUserPermissions();
|
||||
|
||||
return useMemo(() => (permissions.get(key) ?? 0) > 0, [ permissions, key ]);
|
||||
return useMemo(() => permissions.get(key) === 1, [ permissions, key ]);
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* Reactive raw permission value (1 = ALLOWED, 2 = ROOM_OWNER, 0 if
|
||||
* absent). Useful for the handful of permissions whose
|
||||
* `permission_definitions.max_value > 1` (e.g.
|
||||
* `acc_closedice_room`) where the precise value matters.
|
||||
* Reactive raw permission value:
|
||||
* 0 = DISALLOWED (also returned for absent keys)
|
||||
* 1 = ALLOWED
|
||||
* 2 = ROOM_OWNER (granted only when the caller is the active
|
||||
* room owner — combine with `roomSession.isRoomOwner`)
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Use this when the gate needs to distinguish ROOM_OWNER from
|
||||
* plain ALLOWED, or for the handful of permissions whose
|
||||
* `permission_definitions.max_value > 1`.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
export const usePermissionValue = (key: string): number =>
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user