paperclip/server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts

601 lines
20 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures. ![Secrets inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png) ![Secret binding picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png) ![Environment editor with secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png) ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
import express from "express";
import request from "supertest";
import { beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
import { secretRoutes } from "../routes/secrets.js";
import { errorHandler } from "../middleware/error-handler.js";
import { HttpError, unprocessable } from "../errors.js";
const mockSecretService = vi.hoisted(() => ({
listProviders: vi.fn(),
checkProviders: vi.fn(),
listProviderConfigs: vi.fn(),
[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change: ![Provider vaults tab](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/provider-vaults-tab.png) AWS discovery candidate flow: ![AWS discovery candidate flow](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/aws-discovery-candidates.png) Provider vault removal confirmation: ![Provider vault removal confirmation](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/remove-provider-vault-confirmation.png) ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-19 15:50:23 -05:00
previewProviderConfigDiscovery: vi.fn(),
Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures. ![Secrets inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png) ![Secret binding picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png) ![Environment editor with secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png) ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
getProviderConfigById: vi.fn(),
createProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
updateProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
disableProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change: ![Provider vaults tab](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/provider-vaults-tab.png) AWS discovery candidate flow: ![AWS discovery candidate flow](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/aws-discovery-candidates.png) Provider vault removal confirmation: ![Provider vault removal confirmation](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/remove-provider-vault-confirmation.png) ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-19 15:50:23 -05:00
removeProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures. ![Secrets inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png) ![Secret binding picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png) ![Environment editor with secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png) ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
setDefaultProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
checkProviderConfigHealth: vi.fn(),
getById: vi.fn(),
create: vi.fn(),
update: vi.fn(),
remove: vi.fn(),
previewRemoteImport: vi.fn(),
importRemoteSecrets: vi.fn(),
}));
const mockLogActivity = vi.hoisted(() => vi.fn());
vi.mock("../services/index.js", () => ({
secretService: () => mockSecretService,
logActivity: mockLogActivity,
}));
function createApp(actor: Record<string, unknown> = {
type: "board",
userId: "user-1",
source: "session",
companyIds: ["company-1"],
memberships: [{ companyId: "company-1", status: "active", membershipRole: "admin" }],
}) {
const app = express();
app.use(express.json());
app.use((req, _res, next) => {
(req as any).actor = actor;
next();
});
app.use("/api", secretRoutes({} as any));
app.use(errorHandler);
return app;
}
describe("secret routes", () => {
beforeEach(() => {
for (const mock of Object.values(mockSecretService)) {
mock.mockReset();
}
mockLogActivity.mockReset();
});
it("returns provider health checks for board callers with company access", async () => {
mockSecretService.checkProviders.mockResolvedValue([
{
provider: "local_encrypted",
status: "ok",
message: "Local encrypted provider configured",
backupGuidance: ["Back up the key file together with database backups."],
},
]);
const res = await request(createApp()).get("/api/companies/company-1/secret-providers/health");
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(res.body).toEqual({
providers: [
{
provider: "local_encrypted",
status: "ok",
message: "Local encrypted provider configured",
backupGuidance: ["Back up the key file together with database backups."],
},
],
});
});
it("rejects managed secret creation when externalRef is supplied", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp()).post("/api/companies/company-1/secrets").send({
name: "OpenAI API Key",
managedMode: "paperclip_managed",
value: "secret-value",
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:shared/other",
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/Managed secrets cannot set externalRef/);
expect(mockSecretService.create).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("rejects provider vault routes for non-board actors", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp({
type: "agent",
agentId: "agent-1",
companyId: "company-1",
})).get("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs");
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(mockSecretService.listProviderConfigs).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("rejects provider vault cross-company access before calling the service", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp({
type: "board",
userId: "user-1",
source: "session",
companyIds: ["company-2"],
memberships: [{ companyId: "company-2", status: "active", membershipRole: "admin" }],
})).get("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs");
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(mockSecretService.listProviderConfigs).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change: ![Provider vaults tab](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/provider-vaults-tab.png) AWS discovery candidate flow: ![AWS discovery candidate flow](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/aws-discovery-candidates.png) Provider vault removal confirmation: ![Provider vault removal confirmation](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/remove-provider-vault-confirmation.png) ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-19 15:50:23 -05:00
it("rejects provider vault discovery preview for non-board actors", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp({
type: "agent",
agentId: "agent-1",
companyId: "company-1",
}))
.post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs/discovery/preview")
.send({
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
});
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(mockSecretService.previewProviderConfigDiscovery).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures. ![Secrets inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png) ![Secret binding picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png) ![Environment editor with secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png) ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
it("rejects sensitive provider vault config fields", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp()).post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs").send({
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
config: {
region: "us-east-1",
accessKeyId: "AKIA...",
},
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/sensitive field/i);
expect(mockSecretService.createProviderConfig).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change: ![Provider vaults tab](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/provider-vaults-tab.png) AWS discovery candidate flow: ![AWS discovery candidate flow](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/aws-discovery-candidates.png) Provider vault removal confirmation: ![Provider vault removal confirmation](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/remove-provider-vault-confirmation.png) ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-19 15:50:23 -05:00
it("rejects sensitive provider vault discovery draft config fields", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp())
.post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs/discovery/preview")
.send({
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
config: {
region: "us-east-1",
secretAccessKey: "secret",
},
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/sensitive field/i);
expect(mockSecretService.previewProviderConfigDiscovery).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("previews provider vault discovery and logs only aggregate metadata", async () => {
mockSecretService.previewProviderConfigDiscovery.mockResolvedValue({
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
nextToken: null,
sampledSecretCount: 2,
skippedForeignPaperclipSampleCount: 0,
candidates: [
{
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS production",
config: {
region: "us-east-1",
namespace: "prod-use1",
secretNamePrefix: "paperclip",
environmentTag: "production",
ownerTag: "platform",
kmsKeyId: null,
},
sampleCount: 2,
samples: [
{ name: "paperclip/prod-use1/company-1/openai", hasKmsKey: false, tagKeys: ["environment"] },
],
signals: {
namespace: "prod-use1",
secretNamePrefix: "paperclip",
environmentTag: "production",
ownerTag: "platform",
kmsKeyId: null,
hasKmsKey: false,
sampleCount: 2,
paperclipManagedSampleCount: 0,
skippedForeignPaperclipSampleCount: 0,
},
warnings: [],
},
],
warnings: [],
});
const res = await request(createApp())
.post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs/discovery/preview")
.send({
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
query: "paperclip",
pageSize: 25,
});
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockSecretService.previewProviderConfigDiscovery).toHaveBeenCalledWith("company-1", {
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
query: "paperclip",
nextToken: undefined,
pageSize: 25,
});
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(expect.anything(), expect.objectContaining({
action: "secret_provider_config.discovery_previewed",
entityType: "secret_provider_config_discovery",
entityId: "company-1",
details: {
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
candidateCount: 1,
sampledSecretCount: 2,
warningCount: 0,
},
}));
expect(JSON.stringify(mockLogActivity.mock.calls)).not.toContain("paperclip/prod-use1/company-1/openai");
});
Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures. ![Secrets inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png) ![Secret binding picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png) ![Environment editor with secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png) ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
it("rejects ready status for coming-soon provider vaults", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp()).post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs").send({
provider: "vault",
displayName: "Vault draft",
status: "ready",
config: {
address: "https://vault.example.com",
},
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/locked while coming soon/i);
expect(mockSecretService.createProviderConfig).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("rejects credential-bearing Vault provider vault addresses before persistence", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp()).post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs").send({
provider: "vault",
displayName: "Vault draft",
config: {
address: "https://user:pass@vault.example.com",
},
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/origin-only HTTP\(S\) URL/i);
expect(mockSecretService.createProviderConfig).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it.each([
"https://vault.example.com?token=hvs.x",
"https://vault.example.com#token=hvs.x",
])("rejects token-bearing Vault provider vault address %s before persistence", async (address) => {
const res = await request(createApp()).post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs").send({
provider: "vault",
displayName: "Vault draft",
config: { address },
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/origin-only HTTP\(S\) URL/i);
expect(mockSecretService.createProviderConfig).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("rejects unsafe Vault provider vault address patches before persistence", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp()).patch("/api/secret-provider-configs/vault-1").send({
config: {
address: "https://vault.example.com#token=hvs.x",
},
});
expect(res.status).toBe(400);
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).toMatch(/origin-only HTTP\(S\) URL/i);
expect(mockSecretService.getProviderConfigById).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(mockSecretService.updateProviderConfig).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("creates provider vaults and logs safe activity details", async () => {
const createdAt = new Date("2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z");
mockSecretService.createProviderConfig.mockResolvedValue({
id: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
companyId: "company-1",
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
status: "ready",
isDefault: true,
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
healthStatus: null,
healthCheckedAt: null,
healthMessage: null,
healthDetails: null,
disabledAt: null,
createdByAgentId: null,
createdByUserId: "user-1",
createdAt,
updatedAt: createdAt,
});
const res = await request(createApp()).post("/api/companies/company-1/secret-provider-configs").send({
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
isDefault: true,
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
});
expect(res.status).toBe(201);
expect(mockSecretService.createProviderConfig).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"company-1",
{
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
status: undefined,
isDefault: true,
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
},
{ userId: "user-1", agentId: null },
);
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(expect.anything(), expect.objectContaining({
action: "secret_provider_config.created",
details: {
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
status: "ready",
isDefault: true,
},
}));
expect(JSON.stringify(mockLogActivity.mock.calls)).not.toContain("accessKey");
});
[codex] Provider vault secrets UX (#6381) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents that need scoped, auditable access to secrets > - Hosted and external deployments need provider vault configuration without exposing secret values in Paperclip metadata > - AWS Secrets Manager vault setup previously required too much manual operator knowledge > - Provider vault discovery and removal belong together as an independent secrets-management improvement > - This pull request adds AWS provider vault discovery/prefill plus vault removal flows > - The benefit is a safer operator path for configuring external secret storage before higher-level cloud workflows depend on it ## What Changed - Added shared validators/types for AWS provider vault discovery payloads and safe provider metadata. - Implemented AWS provider vault discovery preview on the server. - Added provider vault removal service/route behavior. - Added Secrets page UI for discovery prefill, removal messaging, and related rendering coverage. - Added Storybook provider-vault fixtures and captured screenshots for the new UX states. ## Verification - `pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --ignore-scripts` - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/shared/src/validators/secret.test.ts server/src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-routes.test.ts server/src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - Result: 4 files passed, 1 embedded Postgres-backed file skipped on this host because local Postgres init was unavailable. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui exec vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/ui typecheck` - Storybook screenshot capture against `Product/Secrets` on `http://127.0.0.1:60381/iframe.html?id=product-secrets--secrets-inventory&viewMode=story&globals=theme:dark` ## Screenshots Provider vaults tab after this change: ![Provider vaults tab](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/provider-vaults-tab.png) AWS discovery candidate flow: ![AWS discovery candidate flow](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/aws-discovery-candidates.png) Provider vault removal confirmation: ![Provider vault removal confirmation](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pap-9861-provider-vault-secrets/doc/screenshots/pr-6381/remove-provider-vault-confirmation.png) ## Risks - Secret provider metadata handling must remain non-sensitive; validators reject credential-bearing Vault URLs and sensitive AWS discovery keys. - AWS discovery depends on deployment credentials being configured correctly outside Paperclip-managed company secrets. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5-based coding agent with local shell/git/tool use. Exact hosted model ID and context-window size are not exposed by the local Paperclip adapter runtime. ## 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 run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
2026-05-19 15:50:23 -05:00
it("removes provider vault config locally without deleting remote provider data", async () => {
const createdAt = new Date("2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z");
const providerConfig = {
id: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
companyId: "company-1",
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
status: "ready",
isDefault: false,
config: { region: "us-east-1" },
healthStatus: null,
healthCheckedAt: null,
healthMessage: null,
healthDetails: null,
disabledAt: null,
createdByAgentId: null,
createdByUserId: "user-1",
createdAt,
updatedAt: createdAt,
};
mockSecretService.getProviderConfigById.mockResolvedValue(providerConfig);
mockSecretService.removeProviderConfig.mockResolvedValue(providerConfig);
const res = await request(createApp()).delete(
"/api/secret-provider-configs/11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
);
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockSecretService.removeProviderConfig).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
);
expect(mockSecretService.disableProviderConfig).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(expect.anything(), expect.objectContaining({
action: "secret_provider_config.removed",
details: {
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
displayName: "AWS prod",
remoteDeleted: false,
},
}));
});
Add secrets provider vaults and remote import (#5429) ## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI-agent companies and needs secrets handling to work across local development, hosted operators, and governed agent execution. > - The affected subsystem is the company-scoped secrets control plane: database schema, server services/routes, CLI workflows, and the Secrets settings UI. > - The gap was that secrets were local-only and operators could not manage provider vaults or import existing remote references without exposing plaintext. > - This branch adds provider vault configuration plus an AWS Secrets Manager remote-import path while preserving company boundaries, binding context, and audit trails. > - I kept the PR to a single branch PR, removed unrelated lockfile/package drift, rebased the full branch onto the current `public-gh/master`, and addressed fresh Greptile findings. > - The benefit is a reviewable implementation of provider-backed secrets with focused tests covering provider selection, import conflicts, deleted secret reuse, rotation guards, and AWS signing behavior. ## What Changed - Added provider vault support for company secrets, including provider config storage, default vault handling, health checks, binding usage, access events, and remote import preview/commit. - Added an AWS Secrets Manager provider using SigV4 request signing, bounded request timeouts, namespace guardrails, cached runtime credential resolution, and external-reference linking without plaintext reads. - Added Secrets UI surfaces for vault management and remote import, plus CLI/API documentation for setup and operations. - Stabilized routine webhook secret binding paths and SSH environment-driver fixture bindings discovered during verification. - Addressed Greptile and CI findings: no lockfile/package drift, monotonic migration metadata, disabled-vault default races, soft-deleted secret hiding/recreate behavior, remove behavior with disabled vaults, soft-deleted external-reference re-import, non-active rotation guards, managed-secret soft deletion through PATCH, and per-call AWS SDK credential client churn. - Rebased this branch onto `public-gh/master` at `0e1a5828` and force-pushed with lease to keep this as the single PR for the branch. ## Verification - `git fetch public-gh master` - `git rebase public-gh/master` - `git diff --name-only public-gh/master...HEAD | grep '^pnpm-lock\.yaml$' || true` confirmed `pnpm-lock.yaml` is not in the PR diff. - Confirmed migration ordering: master ends at `0081_optimal_dormammu`; this PR adds `0082_dry_vision` and `0083_company_secret_provider_configs`. - Inspected migrations for repeat safety: new tables/indexes use `IF NOT EXISTS`; foreign keys are guarded by `DO $$ ... IF NOT EXISTS`; column additions use `ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS`. - `pnpm -r typecheck` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. - `pnpm test:run` ran the full stable Vitest path before the Greptile follow-up commits; it completed with 3 timing-related failures under parallel load: `codex-local-execute.test.ts`, `cursor-local-execute.test.ts`, and `environment-service.test.ts`. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/codex-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/cursor-local-execute.test.ts src/__tests__/environment-service.test.ts` passed on targeted rerun (`24/24`). - `pnpm build` passed before the Greptile follow-up commits. Vite reported existing chunk-size/dynamic-import warnings. - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`26/26`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/__tests__/aws-secrets-manager-provider.test.ts src/__tests__/secrets-service.test.ts` passed (`39/39`). - After Greptile follow-up commits: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passed. - Captured Storybook screenshots from `ui/storybook-static` for visual review. - Latest PR checks on `5ca3a5cf`: `policy`, serialized server suites 1/4-4/4, `Canary Dry Run`, `e2e`, `security/snyk`, and `Greptile Review` pass; aggregate `verify` is still registering the completed child checks. - Greptile review loop continued through the latest requested pass; all Greptile review threads are resolved and the latest `Greptile Review` check on `5ca3a5cf` passed with 0 comments added. ## Screenshots Before: the provider-vault and remote-import surfaces did not exist on `master`; these are after-state screenshots from the Storybook fixtures. ![Secrets inventory](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secrets-inventory.png) ![Secret binding picker](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/secret-binding-picker.png) ![Environment editor with secrets](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/paperclipai/paperclip/PAP-2339-secrets-make-a-plan/doc/pr/5429/env-editor-with-secrets.png) ## Risks - Migration risk: this adds new secret provider tables and extends existing secret rows. The migrations were checked for monotonic ordering and idempotent guards, but reviewers should still inspect upgrade behavior carefully. - Provider risk: AWS support uses direct SigV4 requests. Automated tests cover signing, request timeouts, vault-config selection, namespace guardrails, pending-version archival, sanitized provider errors, and service-level cleanup paths. A real-vault AWS smoke test remains deployment validation for an operator with AWS credentials rather than an unverified merge blocker in this local branch. - UI risk: the Secrets page and import dialog are large new surfaces; screenshots are included above for reviewer inspection. - Verification risk: the full local stable test command hit parallel-load timing failures, although the exact failed files passed when rerun directly. - Operational risk: remote import intentionally avoids plaintext reads; operators must understand that imported external references resolve at runtime and may fail if AWS permissions change. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - OpenAI Codex, GPT-5 coding agent with local shell/tool use in the Paperclip worktree. Exact context-window size was not exposed by the runtime. ## 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 - [ ] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing> Co-authored-by: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-09 18:22:17 -05:00
it("rejects remote import preview for non-board actors", async () => {
const res = await request(createApp({
type: "agent",
agentId: "agent-1",
companyId: "company-1",
})).post("/api/companies/company-1/secrets/remote-import/preview").send({
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
});
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(mockSecretService.previewRemoteImport).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("previews remote imports and logs only aggregate metadata", async () => {
mockSecretService.previewRemoteImport.mockResolvedValue({
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
nextToken: null,
candidates: [
{
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:prod/openai",
remoteName: "prod/openai",
name: "openai",
key: "openai",
providerVersionRef: null,
providerMetadata: { description: "OpenAI API key" },
status: "ready",
importable: true,
conflicts: [],
},
],
});
const res = await request(createApp())
.post("/api/companies/company-1/secrets/remote-import/preview")
.send({
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
query: "openai",
pageSize: 25,
});
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockSecretService.previewRemoteImport).toHaveBeenCalledWith("company-1", {
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
query: "openai",
nextToken: undefined,
pageSize: 25,
});
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(expect.anything(), expect.objectContaining({
action: "secret.remote_import.previewed",
details: {
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
candidateCount: 1,
readyCount: 1,
duplicateCount: 0,
conflictCount: 0,
},
}));
expect(JSON.stringify(mockLogActivity.mock.calls)).not.toContain("prod/openai");
});
it("returns sanitized remote import preview provider errors", async () => {
mockSecretService.previewRemoteImport.mockRejectedValue(
new HttpError(
403,
"AWS Secrets Manager denied the request. Check IAM permissions for this provider vault.",
{ code: "access_denied" },
),
);
const res = await request(createApp())
.post("/api/companies/company-1/secrets/remote-import/preview")
.send({
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
});
expect(res.status).toBe(403);
expect(res.body).toEqual({
error: "AWS Secrets Manager denied the request. Check IAM permissions for this provider vault.",
details: { code: "access_denied" },
});
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).not.toContain("arn:aws");
expect(JSON.stringify(res.body)).not.toContain("123456789012");
expect(mockLogActivity).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
});
it("imports remote references and logs aggregate row counts", async () => {
mockSecretService.importRemoteSecrets.mockResolvedValue({
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
importedCount: 1,
skippedCount: 0,
errorCount: 0,
results: [
{
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:prod/openai",
name: "OpenAI API key",
key: "openai-api-key",
status: "imported",
reason: null,
secretId: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
conflicts: [],
},
],
});
const res = await request(createApp())
.post("/api/companies/company-1/secrets/remote-import")
.send({
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
secrets: [
{
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:prod/openai",
name: "OpenAI API key",
key: "openai-api-key",
description: "Operator-entered Paperclip description",
},
],
});
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(mockSecretService.importRemoteSecrets).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"company-1",
{
providerConfigId: "11111111-1111-4111-8111-111111111111",
secrets: [
{
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:prod/openai",
name: "OpenAI API key",
key: "openai-api-key",
description: "Operator-entered Paperclip description",
},
],
},
{ userId: "user-1", agentId: null },
);
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(expect.anything(), expect.objectContaining({
action: "secret.remote_import.completed",
details: {
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
importedCount: 1,
skippedCount: 0,
errorCount: 0,
},
}));
expect(JSON.stringify(mockLogActivity.mock.calls)).not.toContain("prod/openai");
});
it("surfaces update-route externalRef retarget rejection without logging raw refs", async () => {
mockSecretService.getById.mockResolvedValue({
id: "22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
companyId: "company-1",
name: "OpenAI API key",
key: "openai-api-key",
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
managedMode: "external_reference",
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:shared/original",
});
mockSecretService.update.mockRejectedValue(
unprocessable("External reference secrets cannot be retargeted through generic update"),
);
const res = await request(createApp())
.patch("/api/secrets/22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222")
.send({
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:shared/repointed",
});
expect(res.status).toBe(422);
expect(mockSecretService.update).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"22222222-2222-4222-8222-222222222222",
expect.objectContaining({
externalRef: "arn:aws:secretsmanager:us-east-1:123456789012:secret:shared/repointed",
}),
);
expect(mockLogActivity).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
expect(JSON.stringify(mockLogActivity.mock.calls)).not.toContain("shared/repointed");
});
it("allows DELETE to retry cleanup for already soft-deleted secrets", async () => {
const secret = {
id: "33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333",
companyId: "company-1",
name: "OpenAI API Key__deleted__33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333",
key: "openai-api-key__deleted__33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333",
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
managedMode: "paperclip_managed",
status: "deleted",
};
mockSecretService.getById.mockResolvedValue(secret);
mockSecretService.remove.mockResolvedValue(secret);
const res = await request(createApp()).delete(
"/api/secrets/33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333",
);
expect(res.status).toBe(200);
expect(res.body).toEqual({ ok: true });
expect(mockSecretService.remove).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
"33333333-3333-4333-8333-333333333333",
);
expect(mockLogActivity).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.anything(),
expect.objectContaining({
action: "secret.deleted",
companyId: "company-1",
entityId: secret.id,
}),
);
});
});