Repository navigation
docs(security): clarify disconnect fallback checks - #562
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
Documentation build overview
|
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 874bac8e9d
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| default check that the user has a usable password or another association whose | ||
| provider is present in ``AUTHENTICATION_BACKENDS``, optional provider token |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In social-app-django, DjangoUserMixin.allowed_to_disconnect returns valid_password or qs.exists() after excluding the association/provider being removed; it never consults AUTHENTICATION_BACKENDS. Therefore, when a user has an association for a disabled or removed backend, the pipeline can still allow disconnecting their last working login method, contrary to this security assurance (also repeated in pipeline.rst). Document that any remaining association satisfies the current check, unless the implementation is changed to validate configured backends.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
No description provided.