Fixes #1544: Org admins cannot remove themselves through the URL

[laura-barluzzi]

Proposed changes in this pull request

This PR fixes #1544 Organization admins can remove themselves through the URL.
Why this problem occurred? This happened because we don't have a permission action that refers to this user case: an administrator deleting themselves.

Since it's difficult to define this very conditional action in the permission policies, I proposed to simply add a final check inside the OrganizationMembersRemove class before posting the member to be deleted. To do so:

1. I created a function called admin_is_not_deleting_themselves that checks if the current user is an administrator and if the current_user.username == member_to_remove.username.
2. Inside the get() function, I call self.admin_is_not_deleting_themselves() to check if the current user is an administrator trying to remove themselves.
3. If admin_is_not_deleting_themselves() == True --> behaves as before and we post the object to be removed.
4. If admin_is_not_deleting_themselves == False --> the member cannot be removed and so we redirect to the admin/member edit page and we display an error message.

Here you can see a silent short video demo of how this currently works.

When should this PR be merged

• As soon as it is reviewed and approved.

Risks

• This solution cancel the current risk for an organization to remain without an administrator.
• Very low risks.

Follow-up actions

• Close Organization admins can remove themselves through the URL #1544

Checklist (for reviewing)

General

• Is this PR explained thoroughly? All code changes must be accounted for in the PR description.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Is the PR labeled correctly? It should have the migration label if a new migration is added.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Is the risk level assessment sufficient? The risks section should contain all risks that might be introduced with the PR and which actions we need to take to mitigate these risks. Possible risks are database migrations, new libraries that need to be installed or changes to deployment scripts.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Functionality

• Are all requirements met? Compare implemented functionality with the requirements specification.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Does the UI work as expected? There should be no Javascript errors in the console; all resources should load. There should be no unexpected errors. Deliberately try to break the feature to find out if there are corner cases that are not handled.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Code

• Do you fully understand the introduced changes to the code? If not ask for clarification, it might uncover ways to solve a problem in a more elegant and efficient way.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Does the PR introduce any inefficient database requests? Use the debug server to check for duplicate requests.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Are all necessary strings marked for translation? All strings that are exposed to users via the UI must be marked for translation.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Is the code documented sufficiently? Large and complex classes, functions or methods must be annotated with comments following our code-style guidelines.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Has the scalability of this change been evaluated?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Is there a maintenance plan in place?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Tests

• Are there sufficient test cases? Ensure that all components are tested individually; models, forms, and serializers should be tested in isolation even if a test for a view covers these components.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• If this is a bug fix, are tests for the issue in place? There must be a test case for the bug to ensure the issue won’t regress. Make sure that the tests break without the new code to fix the issue.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• If this is a new feature or a significant change to an existing feature? has the manual testing spreadsheet been updated with instructions for manual testing?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Security

• Confirm this PR doesn't commit any keys, passwords, tokens, usernames, or other secrets.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Are all UI and API inputs run through forms or serializers?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Are all external inputs validated and sanitized appropriately?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Does all branching logic have a default case?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Does this solution handle outliers and edge cases gracefully?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Are all external communications secured and restricted to SSL?
  • Review 1
  • Review 2

Documentation

• Are changes to the UI documented in the platform docs? If this PR introduces new platform site functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the Cadasta Platform Documentation.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Are changes to the API documented in the API docs? If this PR introduces new API functionality or changes existing ones, the changes must be documented in the API docs.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2
• Are reusable components documented? If this PR introduces components that are relevant to other developers (for instance a mixin for a view or a generic form) they should be documented in the Wiki.
  • Review 1
  • Review 2

[oliverroick]

The functionality looks good. But there a three smaller things that could be improved in the code.

[oliverroick]

If you check if user == member_to_remove first and return False if not, you can skip the DB queries because you don't need them.

[oliverroick]

If you make this organization__slug=self.kwargs['slug'] you can save the DB query from line 295

[oliverroick]

You can use Python's Dictionary Unpacking here and make this one line only:

return redirect('organization:members_edit', **self.kwargs)

[oliverroick]

Yay 🎉