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.



## 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
|
|
|
// @vitest-environment jsdom
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
import { act } from "react";
|
|
|
|
|
import { createRoot } from "react-dom/client";
|
|
|
|
|
import { MemoryRouter } from "react-router-dom";
|
|
|
|
|
import { QueryClient, QueryClientProvider } from "@tanstack/react-query";
|
|
|
|
|
import type { CompanySecretProviderConfig, SecretProviderDescriptor } from "@paperclipai/shared";
|
|
|
|
|
import { afterEach, beforeEach, describe, expect, it, vi } from "vitest";
|
|
|
|
|
import { ProviderVaultsTab, Secrets } from "./Secrets";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockSecretsApi = vi.hoisted(() => ({
|
|
|
|
|
list: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
providers: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
providerHealth: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
providerConfigs: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
createProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
updateProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
disableProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
setDefaultProviderConfig: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
checkProviderConfigHealth: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
create: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
update: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
rotate: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
disable: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
enable: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
archive: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
remove: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
usage: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
accessEvents: vi.fn(),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const mockSetBreadcrumbs = vi.hoisted(() => vi.fn());
|
|
|
|
|
const mockPushToast = vi.hoisted(() => vi.fn());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../api/secrets", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
secretsApi: mockSecretsApi,
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/CompanyContext", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
useCompany: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
selectedCompanyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/BreadcrumbContext", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
useBreadcrumbs: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
setBreadcrumbs: mockSetBreadcrumbs,
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/ToastContext", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
useToast: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
pushToast: mockPushToast,
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
useToastActions: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
pushToast: mockPushToast,
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vi.mock("../context/SidebarContext", () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
useSidebar: () => ({
|
|
|
|
|
isMobile: false,
|
|
|
|
|
}),
|
|
|
|
|
}));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-explicit-any
|
|
|
|
|
(globalThis as any).IS_REACT_ACT_ENVIRONMENT = true;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const providers: SecretProviderDescriptor[] = [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "local_encrypted",
|
|
|
|
|
label: "Local encrypted",
|
|
|
|
|
requiresExternalRef: false,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsManagedValues: true,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsExternalReferences: false,
|
|
|
|
|
configured: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "aws_secrets_manager",
|
|
|
|
|
label: "AWS Secrets Manager",
|
|
|
|
|
requiresExternalRef: false,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsManagedValues: true,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsExternalReferences: true,
|
|
|
|
|
configured: true,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "gcp_secret_manager",
|
|
|
|
|
label: "GCP Secret Manager",
|
|
|
|
|
requiresExternalRef: false,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsManagedValues: false,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsExternalReferences: true,
|
|
|
|
|
configured: false,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "vault",
|
|
|
|
|
label: "Vault",
|
|
|
|
|
requiresExternalRef: false,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsManagedValues: false,
|
|
|
|
|
supportsExternalReferences: true,
|
|
|
|
|
configured: false,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const providerConfigs = [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "vault-local",
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "local_encrypted",
|
|
|
|
|
displayName: "Local default",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
isDefault: true,
|
|
|
|
|
healthStatus: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
healthCheckedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
healthMessage: null,
|
|
|
|
|
healthDetails: null,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "vault-aws",
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "aws_secrets_manager",
|
|
|
|
|
displayName: "AWS production",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "ready",
|
|
|
|
|
isDefault: false,
|
|
|
|
|
healthStatus: null,
|
|
|
|
|
healthCheckedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
healthMessage: null,
|
|
|
|
|
healthDetails: null,
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
] satisfies Partial<CompanySecretProviderConfig>[];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
async function flushReact() {
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
await Promise.resolve();
|
|
|
|
|
await new Promise((resolve) => window.setTimeout(resolve, 0));
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
describe("Secrets page layout", () => {
|
|
|
|
|
let container: HTMLDivElement;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beforeEach(() => {
|
|
|
|
|
container = document.createElement("div");
|
|
|
|
|
document.body.appendChild(container);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
mockSecretsApi.list.mockResolvedValue([]);
|
|
|
|
|
mockSecretsApi.providers.mockResolvedValue(providers);
|
|
|
|
|
mockSecretsApi.providerHealth.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
providers: [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "local_encrypted",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "warn",
|
|
|
|
|
message: "Local encrypted provider has a warning.",
|
|
|
|
|
warnings: ["Backup reminder"],
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
mockSecretsApi.providerConfigs.mockResolvedValue(providerConfigs);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
afterEach(() => {
|
|
|
|
|
container.remove();
|
|
|
|
|
document.body.innerHTML = "";
|
|
|
|
|
vi.clearAllMocks();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("uses the shared search/filter/tab affordances and keeps vault sections quiet", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: { queries: { retry: false } },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Secrets />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.querySelector('input[data-page-search-target="true"][aria-label="Search secrets"]')).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).toContain("Use secrets by binding them to runtime environment variables.");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).toContain("GH_TOKEN");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.querySelectorAll("select")).toHaveLength(0);
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).not.toContain("Provider warnings detected");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).not.toContain("2/2 active");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const vaultRoot = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
vaultRoot.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<ProviderVaultsTab
|
|
|
|
|
providers={providers}
|
|
|
|
|
providerConfigs={providerConfigs as CompanySecretProviderConfig[]}
|
|
|
|
|
loading={false}
|
|
|
|
|
error={null}
|
|
|
|
|
onRetry={vi.fn()}
|
|
|
|
|
onCreate={vi.fn()}
|
|
|
|
|
onEdit={vi.fn()}
|
|
|
|
|
onDisable={vi.fn()}
|
|
|
|
|
onSetDefault={vi.fn()}
|
|
|
|
|
onHealthCheck={vi.fn()}
|
|
|
|
|
pendingActionId={null}
|
|
|
|
|
/>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.querySelector('a[href="#provider-vaults-local_encrypted"]')).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).toContain("AWS production");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).not.toContain("Managed writes");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(container.textContent).not.toContain("External refs");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
vaultRoot.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("opens reference details from the secrets table count", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
mockSecretsApi.list.mockResolvedValue([
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "secret-openai",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
key: "openai_api_key",
|
|
|
|
|
name: "OPENAI_API_KEY",
|
|
|
|
|
provider: "local_encrypted",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "active",
|
|
|
|
|
managedMode: "paperclip_managed",
|
|
|
|
|
externalRef: null,
|
|
|
|
|
providerConfigId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
providerMetadata: null,
|
|
|
|
|
latestVersion: 1,
|
|
|
|
|
description: null,
|
|
|
|
|
lastResolvedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
lastRotatedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
deletedAt: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByAgentId: null,
|
|
|
|
|
createdByUserId: "user-1",
|
|
|
|
|
referenceCount: 2,
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
]);
|
|
|
|
|
mockSecretsApi.usage.mockResolvedValue({
|
|
|
|
|
secretId: "secret-openai",
|
|
|
|
|
bindings: [
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
id: "binding-agent",
|
|
|
|
|
companyId: "company-1",
|
|
|
|
|
secretId: "secret-openai",
|
|
|
|
|
targetType: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
targetId: "agent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
configPath: "env.OPENAI_API_KEY",
|
|
|
|
|
versionSelector: "latest",
|
|
|
|
|
required: true,
|
|
|
|
|
label: null,
|
|
|
|
|
target: {
|
|
|
|
|
type: "agent",
|
|
|
|
|
id: "agent-1",
|
|
|
|
|
label: "CodexCoder",
|
|
|
|
|
href: "/agents/codexcoder",
|
|
|
|
|
status: "idle",
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
createdAt: new Date("2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
updatedAt: new Date("2026-05-06T00:00:00.000Z"),
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: { queries: { retry: false } },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<MemoryRouter>
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Secrets />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>
|
|
|
|
|
</MemoryRouter>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const referencesButton = container.querySelector(
|
|
|
|
|
'button[aria-label="View references for OPENAI_API_KEY"]',
|
|
|
|
|
) as HTMLButtonElement | null;
|
|
|
|
|
expect(referencesButton?.textContent).toBe("2");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
referencesButton?.click();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expect(mockSecretsApi.usage).toHaveBeenCalledWith("secret-openai");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(document.body.textContent).toContain("Secret references");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(document.body.textContent).toContain("CodexCoder");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(document.body.textContent).toContain("env.OPENAI_API_KEY");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
Fix new secret form textarea overflow (PAPA-348) (#6222)
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies
> - Operators manage per-company secrets through the Secrets page in the
web UI
> - A long secret value pasted into the "New secret" textarea blew out
the form's width, which pushed the Create/Cancel buttons off-screen and
made the form unusable
> - Root cause: the shadcn `Textarea` primitive sets `w-full` but does
not constrain `min-width`, so a flex parent honors the textarea's
intrinsic content width when a long unbreakable string is present
> - This pull request adds `min-w-0 max-w-full` to the shared `Textarea`
primitive and `min-w-0 overflow-x-hidden break-all` on the secret-value
usage so a long token wraps inside the form bounds
> - The benefit is the Create/Cancel buttons stay reachable regardless
of pasted token length, and every other `Textarea` consumer also gets
the flexbox-friendly width constraint
## What Changed
- `ui/src/components/ui/textarea.tsx`: added `min-w-0 max-w-full` to the
base shadcn `Textarea` so it cannot exceed its flex parent
- `ui/src/pages/Secrets.tsx`: added `min-w-0 overflow-x-hidden
break-all` on the new-secret value `Textarea` so long opaque tokens wrap
instead of pushing the form
- `ui/src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx`: new regression test that opens
the New Secret dialog and asserts the value textarea carries the
width-constraint classes
## Verification
- `cd ui && npx vitest run src/pages/Secrets.render.test.tsx` — 3/3 pass
- Manual: open the Secrets page, click "New secret", paste a long
unbroken string (e.g. a 500-char token) into the value field. The form
stays within its dialog and the Create/Cancel buttons remain in view.
Before:
<img width="1772" height="1432" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/cb31a290-f82a-41dc-9346-91d18cbb5911"
/>
After:
<img width="672" height="734" alt="Screenshot 2026-05-17 at 5 39 38 PM"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/a08800c2-b09b-43be-b0e8-114d9149b8f5"
/>
After: the value field wraps with `break-all` inside the dialog;
Create/Cancel stay clickable. Covered by the new render test which
asserts `min-w-0`, `overflow-x-hidden`, and `break-all` are present on
`#new-secret-value`.
## Risks
- Low risk. The base `Textarea` change adds `min-w-0 max-w-full`, which
only affects layouts where a textarea was previously allowed to grow
past its parent — those cases were already buggy. `break-all` on the
secret-value textarea is the right behavior for opaque tokens; it would
be wrong for prose, but this field is explicitly a secret token.
## Model Used
- Provider: Anthropic Claude
- Model: claude-opus-4-7 (Opus 4.7)
- Mode: standard Claude Code agent, tool use enabled
## 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
- [ ] 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
2026-05-17 17:54:15 -07:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
it("keeps the new secret value textarea width-constrained for long tokens", async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
const root = createRoot(container);
|
|
|
|
|
const queryClient = new QueryClient({
|
|
|
|
|
defaultOptions: { queries: { retry: false } },
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.render(
|
|
|
|
|
<MemoryRouter>
|
|
|
|
|
<QueryClientProvider client={queryClient}>
|
|
|
|
|
<Secrets />
|
|
|
|
|
</QueryClientProvider>
|
|
|
|
|
</MemoryRouter>,
|
|
|
|
|
);
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const newSecretButton = Array.from(container.querySelectorAll("button")).find(
|
|
|
|
|
(button) => button.textContent?.includes("New secret"),
|
|
|
|
|
) as HTMLButtonElement | undefined;
|
|
|
|
|
expect(newSecretButton).toBeDefined();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
newSecretButton?.click();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
await flushReact();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const secretValueTextarea = document.body.querySelector("#new-secret-value") as HTMLTextAreaElement | null;
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secretValueTextarea).not.toBeNull();
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secretValueTextarea?.className).toContain("min-w-0");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secretValueTextarea?.className).toContain("overflow-x-hidden");
|
|
|
|
|
expect(secretValueTextarea?.className).toContain("break-all");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
await act(async () => {
|
|
|
|
|
root.unmount();
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
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.



## 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
|
|
|
});
|