@7365admin1/core 3.47.1-staging.139 → 3.47.1-staging.140

package/.changeset/estate-structure-write-scope.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+"@7365admin1/core": minor
+---
+
+Scope the estate-structure writes to the site they act on.
+
+`POST/PATCH/PUT` on `/api/buildings`, `/api/building-levels` and
+`/api/building-units` all carried `requireAuth` and nothing more. The site came
+from the request body on the creates and the record id came from the URL on the
+edits and deletes, and neither was checked against the caller. So any signed-in
+account on the platform could add a block to another client's estate, rename its
+levels in bulk, or delete its units — the records residents, visitor passes,
+billing and access rights are all hung off.
+
+Ten routes now decide from the site:
+
+- `POST /api/buildings/`, `POST /api/building-levels/`,
+  `POST /api/building-units/` — from the site named in the body, which is where
+  the new record lands.
+- `PATCH /api/buildings/id/:id`, `PUT /api/buildings/:id`,
+  `PUT /api/building-levels/id/:id`, `PUT /api/building-levels/:id`,
+  `PATCH /api/building-units/id/:id`, `PUT /api/building-units/:id` — the stored
+  record is loaded first and its own site decides. The id in the URL selects the
+  record; it never authorises it.
+- `PATCH /api/building-levels/batch` — EVERY id in the batch is checked, not
+  just the first, and only the distinct sites are looked up so renaming twelve
+  levels of one block stays one check.
+
+The rule is `entitleSite`, the site-reach rule the camera, HID and people
+modules already use: a membership pinned to the site, an org-wide membership at
+the site's owning organisation, or an ACTIVE `customer.sites` engagement. The
+engagement branch is required, not incidental — the estate structure is
+maintained from the property-management and service-provider apps, whose users
+may hold no membership in the estate's own organisation.
+
+The shared four lines live in a new `src/utils/site-reach.util.ts` so the same
+check is not written out in three controllers. It introduces no second
+mechanism: it resolves the caller with `resolveInviteActor` and defers to
+`entitleSite`, exactly as `person.controller.ts` does.
+
+A site the caller cannot reach answers as a site that does not exist, so site
+ids cannot be enumerated by watching the difference. A record with no site at
+all is refused rather than waved through.
+
+The READS on these three routers are deliberately unchanged. Six of them share
+a controller function with a pre-login signup alias
+(`/buildings/list/site/resident/:siteId`, `/building-levels/list/site/resident/:siteId`,
+`/building-units/resident/site/:site/block/:block/level/:level` and the three
+`resident` variants), which the resident mobile app calls before an account
+exists. Guarding the handler would break registration on a shipped client, so
+those need the alias split first.