Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Extend backup API with file name field #5567

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

agners
Copy link
Member

@agners agners commented Jan 21, 2025

Proposed change

Allow to specify a backup file name when creating a backup. This allows for user friendly backup file names. If none is specified, the current behavior remains (backup file name is the backup slug).

Type of change

  • Dependency upgrade
  • Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (which adds functionality to the supervisor)
  • Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
  • Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

  • This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
  • This PR is related to issue:
  • Link to documentation pull request:
  • Link to cli pull request:
  • Link to client library pull request:

Checklist

  • The code change is tested and works locally.
  • Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
  • There is no commented out code in this PR.
  • I have followed the development checklist
  • The code has been formatted using Ruff (ruff format supervisor tests)
  • Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If API endpoints or add-on configuration are added/changed:

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Added option to specify custom filename when creating backups
    • Enhanced backup creation flexibility with optional filename parameter
  • Tests

    • Added test coverage for new filename functionality in backup process

@agners agners added the new-feature A new feature label Jan 21, 2025
Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 21, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes introduce an optional filename feature for backup operations in the Home Assistant Supervisor. This enhancement allows users to specify a custom filename when creating backups. The modifications span across the backup API schema, backup manager, and test suite, adding a new filename parameter to backup-related methods and extending the schema to support this optional attribute.

Changes

File Change Summary
supervisor/api/backups.py Added optional ATTR_FILENAME attribute to SCHEMA_BACKUP_FULL schema
supervisor/backups/manager.py Updated backup methods (_create_backup, do_backup_full, do_backup_partial) to accept an optional filename parameter
tests/backups/test_manager.py Added new test test_do_backup_full_with_filename to validate filename functionality

Sequence Diagram

sequenceDiagram
    participant User
    participant BackupAPI
    participant BackupManager
    participant FileSystem

    User->>BackupAPI: Request backup with optional filename
    BackupAPI->>BackupManager: Create backup
    BackupManager->>BackupManager: Determine backup filename
    alt Custom filename provided
        BackupManager->>FileSystem: Create backup with custom filename
    else No filename provided
        BackupManager->>FileSystem: Create backup with generated filename
    end
    FileSystem-->>BackupManager: Backup created
    BackupManager-->>BackupAPI: Backup completed
    BackupAPI-->>User: Backup confirmation
Loading
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai or @coderabbitai title anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)
supervisor/backups/manager.py (1)

187-187: Add docstring for the filename parameter.

Document the new filename parameter to help users understand its purpose and any restrictions.

     """Initialize a new backup object from name.

+    Args:
+        name: Display name for the backup
+        filename: Optional filename for the backup tar file. Path components will be stripped.
+        sys_type: Type of backup (full or partial)
+        password: Optional password to encrypt the backup
+        compressed: Whether to compress the backup
+        location: Where to store the backup
+        extra: Additional metadata to store with backup
+
     Must be called from an existing backup job.
     """
tests/backups/test_backup.py (1)

22-22: Add newline at end of file.

Add a trailing newline to follow Python coding style guidelines.

-    assert backup.tarfile.exists()
+    assert backup.tarfile.exists()
+
🧰 Tools
🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)

22-22: No newline at end of file

Add trailing newline

(W292)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 805017e and 533a61c.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • supervisor/api/backups.py (2 hunks)
  • supervisor/backups/manager.py (6 hunks)
  • tests/backups/test_backup.py (1 hunks)
  • tests/backups/test_manager.py (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Ruff (0.8.2)
tests/backups/test_backup.py

22-22: No newline at end of file

Add trailing newline

(W292)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)
  • GitHub Check: Run tests Python 3.13.1
  • GitHub Check: Build armv7 supervisor
  • GitHub Check: Build armhf supervisor
  • GitHub Check: Build aarch64 supervisor
🔇 Additional comments (2)
supervisor/backups/manager.py (1)

201-204: LGTM! Secure filename handling implemented.

The use of Path(filename).name ensures that any path traversal attempts are stripped, making this implementation secure.

tests/backups/test_manager.py (1)

76-99: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage for the new filename feature.

The test cases effectively verify:

  • Path traversal prevention with ../my file.tar
  • Default behavior when filename is None
  • Correct path construction in both cases

@@ -98,6 +99,7 @@ def _ensure_list(item: Any) -> list:
SCHEMA_BACKUP_FULL = vol.Schema(
{
vol.Optional(ATTR_NAME): str,
vol.Optional(ATTR_FILENAME): str,
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot Jan 21, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

⚠️ Potential issue

Add validation for the filename field to prevent path traversal.

The filename field should be validated to prevent path traversal attacks and ensure it follows a safe format. Consider using the existing RE_BACKUP_FILENAME regex pattern or creating a new one specifically for custom filenames.

Apply this diff to add validation:

-        vol.Optional(ATTR_FILENAME): str,
+        vol.Optional(ATTR_FILENAME): vol.Match(RE_BACKUP_FILENAME),

Committable suggestion skipped: line range outside the PR's diff.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm unresolving this because as far as I can tell CodeRabbit is correct here. This is an issue, we need to have validation and its suggestion would work great (since we already have this regex defined and aren't using it for some reason 😆 )

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mdegat01 Thank you for confirming! Yes, using the existing RE_BACKUP_FILENAME regex pattern would be perfect here as it:

  1. Prevents path traversal attacks by disallowing slashes and backslashes
  2. Ensures consistent .tar extension
  3. Is already defined and tested in the codebase

The validation can be added by changing:

vol.Optional(ATTR_FILENAME): str,

to:

vol.Optional(ATTR_FILENAME): vol.Match(RE_BACKUP_FILENAME),

If you found this review helpful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on X?
Thank you for using CodeRabbit!

Allow to specify a backup file name when creating a backup. This allows
for user friendly backup file names. If none is specified, the current
behavior remains (backup file name is the backup slug).
@agners agners force-pushed the allow--specifying-backup-filename branch from 533a61c to 34301b1 Compare January 22, 2025 08:29
Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
tests/backups/test_manager.py (1)

76-79: Consider adding more edge cases to the test parameterization.

The test could be enhanced by adding cases for:

  • Special characters in filenames
  • Empty string filename
  • Very long filenames
  • Non-ASCII characters
 @pytest.mark.parametrize(
     ("filename", "filename_expected"),
     [("../my file.tar", "/data/backup/my file.tar"), (None, "/data/backup/{}.tar")],
+    [
+        ("../my file.tar", "/data/backup/my file.tar"),
+        (None, "/data/backup/{}.tar"),
+        ("", "/data/backup/{}.tar"),
+        ("a" * 255 + ".tar", "/data/backup/{}.tar"),
+        ("special_#$@!.tar", "/data/backup/special_#$@!.tar"),
+        ("über_backup.tar", "/data/backup/über_backup.tar"),
+    ],
 )
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 533a61c and 34301b1.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • supervisor/api/backups.py (2 hunks)
  • supervisor/backups/manager.py (6 hunks)
  • tests/backups/test_manager.py (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • supervisor/api/backups.py
  • supervisor/backups/manager.py
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)
  • GitHub Check: Run tests Python 3.13.1
  • GitHub Check: Build armv7 supervisor
  • GitHub Check: Build armhf supervisor
  • GitHub Check: Build aarch64 supervisor
🔇 Additional comments (2)
tests/backups/test_manager.py (2)

76-79: LGTM! Well-structured test parameterization.

The test cases effectively cover both custom filename and default filename scenarios, with proper path normalization.


80-95: LGTM! Comprehensive test implementation.

The test function thoroughly verifies:

  • Backup filename handling with path normalization
  • System state preservation
  • Proper slug generation and formatting

Copy link
Contributor

@mdegat01 mdegat01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks fine. However today when you download a backup we name the file like this:

response.headers[CONTENT_DISPOSITION] = (
f"attachment; filename={RE_SLUGIFY_NAME.sub('_', backup.name)}.tar"
)

I don't think this is correct anymore right? If the user has named the backup file then we should use their name. Perhaps a conditional that if the name is anything other then {slug}.tar we use the name as is, else we do what we do today?

@home-assistant
Copy link

Please take a look at the requested changes, and use the Ready for review button when you are done, thanks 👍

Learn more about our pull request process.

@home-assistant home-assistant bot marked this pull request as draft January 22, 2025 17:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants