mirror of
https://github.com/duckietm/Nitro-V3.git
synced 2026-06-21 07:56:20 +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);
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user