Close#14292
## Issue
File ancestry endpoints return folder metadata without validating tenant
permissions, allowing any authenticated user to query arbitrary
`file_id` values across tenant boundaries.
## Affected Endpoints
- `GET /v1/file/parent_folder?file_id={file_id}`
- `GET /v1/file/all_parent_folder?file_id={file_id}`
- `GET /api/v1/files/{id}/ancestors`
## Root Cause
These endpoints **skip the permission check** that other file operations
(Delete, Download, Move) perform.
## Expected Permission Check
All file operations should follow this 3-step validation:
- Check file.tenant_id
- Check if user_id belongs to this tenant (via user_tenant join table)
- Check KB permission type (team permission)
**Code reference:** This is implemented in `checkFileTeamPermission()`
and used by Delete/Download/Move, but **missing** from
GetParentFolder/GetAllParentFolders.
## Reproduction
```bash
# User B (tenant: BBB) accessing User A's file (tenant: AAA)
curl -H "Authorization: Bearer USER_B_TOKEN" \
"http://localhost:9384/v1/file/parent_folder?file_id=AAA_FILE_123"
# Result: Returns User A's folder metadata ❌
# Expected: "No authorization." ✅
Fix
Pass userID from handler to service and call checkFileTeamPermission() — same as Download/Delete/Move handlers.
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
### Related issues
Closes#14648
### What problem does this PR solve?
This PR fixes an authorization flaw in `POST /files/link-to-datasets`.
Before this change, the endpoint only checked whether the supplied
`file_ids` and `kb_ids` existed. It did not verify whether the
authenticated user was actually allowed to access those files or target
datasets. As a result, an authenticated user who knew valid IDs could
relink another user's files to arbitrary datasets.
This was especially risky because the relinking flow is state-changing:
the background worker removes existing file-document mappings and then
recreates documents under the attacker-supplied dataset IDs.
This change makes the route enforce the same permission model already
used by nearby file and document operations:
- each resolved file must pass `check_file_team_permission(...)`
- each target dataset must pass `check_kb_team_permission(...)`
- authorization is enforced before scheduling background relinking work
### Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New Feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Documentation Update
- [ ] Refactoring
- [ ] Performance Improvement
- [ ] Other (please describe):
### Testing
- Added regression coverage in
`test/testcases/test_web_api/test_file_app/test_file2document_routes_unit.py`
- Covered:
- unauthorized file access is rejected
- unauthorized dataset access is rejected
- existing success path still returns immediately after scheduling
background work
- Attempted to run:
- `python -m pytest
test\\testcases\\test_web_api\\test_file_app\\test_file2document_routes_unit.py
-q`
- Local execution in this workspace is currently blocked by missing test
dependencies during bootstrap, including `ragflow_sdk`
---------
Co-authored-by: jony376 <jony376@gmail.com>
Problem
The /file2document/convert endpoint ran all file lookups, document
deletions, and insertions synchronously inside the
request cycle. Linking a large folder (~1.7GB with many files) caused
504 Gateway Timeout because the blocking DB loop
held the HTTP connection open for too long.
Fix
- Extracted the heavy DB work into a plain sync function _convert_files
- Inputs are validated and folder file IDs expanded upfront (fast path)
- The blocking work is dispatched to a thread pool via
get_running_loop().run_in_executor() and the endpoint returns 200
immediately
- Frontend only checks data.code === 0 so the response change
(file2documents list → True) has no impact
Fixes#13781
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
### What problem does this PR solve?
Files /file API to RESTFul style.
### Type of change
- [x] Documentation Update
- [x] Refactoring
---------
Co-authored-by: writinwaters <cai.keith@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Liu An <asiro@qq.com>
### What problem does this PR solve?
Codecov’s coverage report shows that several RAGFlow code paths are
currently untested or under-tested. This makes it easier for regressions
to slip in during refactors and feature work.
This PR adds targeted automated tests to cover the files and branches
highlighted by Codecov, improving confidence in core behavior while
keeping runtime functionality unchanged.
### Type of change
- [x] Other (please describe): Test coverage improvement (adds/extends
unit and integration tests to address Codecov-reported gaps)
