@oneuptime/common 12.0.30 → 12.0.31

package/Tests/Utils/EnterpriseLicenseSeats.test.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,507 @@
+import EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary from "../../Types/EnterpriseLicense/EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary";
+import EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil, {
+  SeatUsage,
+  SeatUsageInput,
+} from "../../Utils/EnterpriseLicense/EnterpriseLicenseSeats";
+import { describe, expect, it } from "@jest/globals";
+
+/*
+ * The arithmetic behind "you cannot add another user".
+ *
+ * An enterprise license is bought for a number of users and shared by every
+ * instance the customer runs on that key. Until now nothing on the customer's
+ * side acted on that number — the limit was mirrored into GlobalConfig, drawn
+ * on a progress bar, and otherwise ignored, so a 50-seat license and a 5000-
+ * seat license behaved identically.
+ *
+ * Deciding whether one more user fits is not a comparison, because neither
+ * number this installation holds is the answer:
+ *
+ *   localUserCount      live, and blind to the customer's other instances.
+ *   aggregatedUserCount deduplicated across every instance, and up to a day
+ *                       old — so it does not know about the person being
+ *                       invited right now, which is the only person the check
+ *                       is about.
+ *
+ * These tests pin how those are combined, and — at least as importantly — pin
+ * which way every "cannot tell" case is allowed to fall. Under-enforcing is
+ * corrected by the next daily report. Over-enforcing locks a paying customer
+ * out of their own installation, so no missing, malformed or contradictory
+ * field is allowed to invent seats that are not there.
+ */
+
+type MakeInstanceFunction = (
+  overrides?: Partial<EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary>,
+) => EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary;
+
+const makeInstance: MakeInstanceFunction = (
+  overrides?: Partial<EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary>,
+): EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary => {
+  return {
+    instanceId: "instance-1",
+    host: "oneuptime.acme.internal",
+    userCount: 10,
+    lastReportedAt: "2026-01-01T00:00:00.000Z",
+    version: "12.0.30",
+    ...overrides,
+  };
+};
+
+type SeatsFunction = (input: Partial<SeatUsageInput>) => SeatUsage;
+
+const seats: SeatsFunction = (input: Partial<SeatUsageInput>): SeatUsage => {
+  return EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil.getSeatUsage({
+    localUserCount: 0,
+    ...input,
+  } as SeatUsageInput);
+};
+
+describe("EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil - is there a limit at all", () => {
+  it("does not enforce when the license carries no seat limit", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({ userLimit: null, localUserCount: 9999 });
+
+    expect(usage.isEnforced).toBe(false);
+    expect(usage.userLimit).toBeNull();
+    expect(usage.seatsRemaining).toBeNull();
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it("does not enforce when the seat limit was never set", () => {
+    expect(seats({ localUserCount: 9999 }).isEnforced).toBe(false);
+    expect(
+      seats({ userLimit: undefined, localUserCount: 9999 }).isEnforced,
+    ).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * Zero is read as "no limit", matching the license modal and the breach
+   * notification job, both of which treat userLimit <= 0 as nothing to measure
+   * against. Reading it as "nobody may have an account" would leave a stray
+   * zero — a bad import, a half-filled form on oneuptime.com — unable to create
+   * even the first user of an installation.
+   */
+  it("treats a zero seat limit as no limit rather than no seats", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({ userLimit: 0, localUserCount: 0 });
+
+    expect(usage.isEnforced).toBe(false);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it("ignores a negative seat limit", () => {
+    expect(seats({ userLimit: -10, localUserCount: 5 }).isEnforced).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  it.each([
+    ["a fractional limit", 10.5],
+    ["infinity", Number.POSITIVE_INFINITY],
+    ["NaN", Number.NaN],
+  ])("ignores %s as a seat limit", (_label: string, userLimit: number) => {
+    expect(seats({ userLimit: userLimit, localUserCount: 5 }).isEnforced).toBe(
+      false,
+    );
+  });
+
+  it("ignores a seat limit that is not a number at all", () => {
+    expect(
+      seats({
+        userLimit: "150" as unknown as number,
+        localUserCount: 5,
+      }).isEnforced,
+    ).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  it("enforces the smallest real limit there is", () => {
+    expect(seats({ userLimit: 1, localUserCount: 0 }).hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(
+      true,
+    );
+    expect(seats({ userLimit: 1, localUserCount: 1 }).hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(
+      false,
+    );
+  });
+});
+
+describe("EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil - a single instance", () => {
+  it("has room while users are below the limit", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({ userLimit: 10, localUserCount: 7 });
+
+    expect(usage.isEnforced).toBe(true);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(7);
+    expect(usage.seatsRemaining).toBe(3);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * The boundary the whole feature turns on. A license bought for 10 users
+   * covers the 10th; it is the 11th that has to be refused.
+   */
+  it("refuses the user that would step past the limit", () => {
+    expect(seats({ userLimit: 10, localUserCount: 9 }).hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(
+      true,
+    );
+    expect(seats({ userLimit: 10, localUserCount: 10 }).hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(
+      false,
+    );
+  });
+
+  it("reports no seats remaining rather than a negative number when over the limit", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({ userLimit: 10, localUserCount: 25 });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(25);
+    expect(usage.seatsRemaining).toBe(0);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  it("still reports usage on an unlimited license, it just never blocks", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({ userLimit: null, localUserCount: 25 });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(25);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it.each([
+    ["a negative count", -5],
+    ["a fractional count", 4.5],
+    ["NaN", Number.NaN],
+  ])(
+    "falls back to zero local users for %s",
+    (_label: string, localUserCount: number) => {
+      expect(
+        seats({ userLimit: 10, localUserCount: localUserCount }).seatsInUse,
+      ).toBe(0);
+    },
+  );
+});
+
+describe("EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil - the licence-wide count", () => {
+  /*
+   * The aggregate is the only number that knows about the customer's other
+   * instances, so it has to be able to exhaust the limit on its own — even
+   * though this installation has barely any users of its own.
+   */
+  it("blocks on the licence-wide count even when this instance is nearly empty", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 3,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 100,
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(100);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * And the live local count has to be able to exhaust it on its own too: the
+   * aggregate is up to a day old, so it is systematically behind on exactly
+   * the users this check exists to catch.
+   */
+  it("blocks on the live local count even when the last report was lower", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 100,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 12,
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(100);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  it.each([
+    ["null", null],
+    ["undefined", undefined],
+    ["a negative number", -1],
+    ["a fraction", 12.5],
+    ["a string", "12" as unknown as number],
+  ])(
+    "ignores a licence-wide count of %s and falls back to the local one",
+    (_label: string, aggregatedUserCount: number | null | undefined) => {
+      const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+        userLimit: 100,
+        localUserCount: 40,
+        aggregatedUserCount: aggregatedUserCount,
+      });
+
+      expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(40);
+      expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+    },
+  );
+});
+
+describe("EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil - several instances on one licence", () => {
+  /*
+   * The case the whole instance breakdown exists for. Two instances share a
+   * 100-seat license: this one has 60 users, the other 30, and 10 people have
+   * accounts on both. oneuptime.com deduplicates that to 80.
+   *
+   * Neither number alone is right here — 60 lets the customer overshoot, 80 is
+   * a day stale. Subtracting this instance's last reported count from the
+   * aggregate leaves the 20 seats that are somebody else's, and adding the
+   * live local count back gives a figure that is current here and complete
+   * everywhere else.
+   */
+  it("adds this instance's live users to the seats other instances hold", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 60,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 }),
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-2", userCount: 30 }),
+      ],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(20);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(80);
+    expect(usage.seatsRemaining).toBe(20);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it("sees users added here since the last report, which the aggregate cannot", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      // 25 people signed up since the report that said 60.
+      localUserCount: 85,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 }),
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-2", userCount: 30 }),
+      ],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(105);
+    expect(usage.seatsRemaining).toBe(0);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  it("counts users deleted here since the last report back off the total", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 40,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 }),
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-2", userCount: 30 }),
+      ],
+    });
+
+    // 20 seats elsewhere + 40 live here. The stale 80 no longer decides it.
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(60);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * Complete overlap: the same 60 people on both instances is 60 seats, not
+   * 120. Subtracting our own reported count is what stops this instance being
+   * charged twice for its own users.
+   */
+  it("does not double-count users who exist on more than one instance", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 60,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 60,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 }),
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-2", userCount: 60 }),
+      ],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(0);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(60);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * The stale licence-wide figure is deliberately NOT allowed to outvote the
+   * live local count once the breakdown makes it decomposable. Freeing seats by
+   * deleting users has to free them now, not at the next daily report - which
+   * is the difference between a limit and a lockout.
+   */
+  it("does not let the stale licence-wide figure hold seats that were just freed", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 80,
+      localUserCount: 40,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 }),
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-2", userCount: 30 }),
+      ],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(60);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it("never lets other instances hold a negative number of seats", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 70,
+      // Our own last report is somehow larger than the licence-wide total.
+      aggregatedUserCount: 40,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 70 })],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(0);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(70);
+  });
+});
+
+describe("EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil - when the topology cannot be read", () => {
+  /*
+   * Every branch here resolves to "assume nothing is held elsewhere". That is
+   * the under-enforcing direction on purpose: the daily report corrects an
+   * undercount, and nothing corrects an installation that has wrongly locked
+   * its administrator out of adding users.
+   */
+  it.each([
+    ["there is no instance list", undefined],
+    ["the instance list is null", null],
+    ["the instance list is empty", []],
+  ])(
+    "attributes nothing to other instances when %s",
+    (
+      _label: string,
+      instances: Array<EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary> | null | undefined,
+    ) => {
+      const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+        userLimit: 100,
+        localUserCount: 20,
+        aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+        thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+        instances: instances,
+      });
+
+      expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(0);
+      expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(80);
+    },
+  );
+
+  it("attributes nothing to other instances when this instance has no id", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 20,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: null,
+      instances: [makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-2", userCount: 80 })],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(0);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(80);
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * The dangerous reading of "we are not in the list" is "then the whole
+   * aggregate belongs to somebody else". It is right for an instance that has
+   * genuinely never registered, and catastrophic for one whose instance id
+   * changed after its users had already been counted under the old one — that
+   * installation would be charged twice for every user it has and could lock
+   * itself out. It is not taken.
+   */
+  it("does not assume the whole aggregate is somebody else's when this instance is missing from the list", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 80,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-that-was-renamed",
+      instances: [makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 80 })],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(0);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(80);
+    expect(usage.hasSeatForNewUser).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it.each([
+    ["null", null],
+    ["a fraction", 12.5 as unknown as number],
+    ["a string", "60" as unknown as number],
+  ])(
+    "attributes nothing to other instances when our own reported count is %s",
+    (_label: string, userCount: number | null) => {
+      const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+        userLimit: 100,
+        localUserCount: 20,
+        aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+        thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+        instances: [
+          makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: userCount }),
+        ],
+      });
+
+      expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(0);
+      expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(80);
+    },
+  );
+
+  it("survives a malformed entry in the instance list", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 60,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "instance-1",
+      instances: [
+        null as unknown as EnterpriseLicenseInstanceSummary,
+        makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 }),
+      ],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(20);
+    expect(usage.seatsInUse).toBe(80);
+  });
+
+  it("matches this instance by its id even with surrounding whitespace", () => {
+    const usage: SeatUsage = seats({
+      userLimit: 100,
+      localUserCount: 60,
+      aggregatedUserCount: 80,
+      thisInstanceId: "  instance-1  ",
+      instances: [makeInstance({ instanceId: "instance-1", userCount: 60 })],
+    });
+
+    expect(usage.seatsUsedByOtherInstances).toBe(20);
+  });
+});
+
+describe("EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil - the message an administrator reads", () => {
+  it("names the limit, the usage and what to do about it", () => {
+    const message: string =
+      EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil.getSeatLimitReachedMessage({
+        seatsInUse: 150,
+        userLimit: 150,
+      });
+
+    expect(message).toContain("150");
+    expect(message).toContain("sales@oneuptime.com");
+    expect(message).toContain("Refresh license");
+  });
+
+  it("does not say 1 users", () => {
+    const message: string =
+      EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil.getSeatLimitReachedMessage({
+        seatsInUse: 1,
+        userLimit: 1,
+      });
+
+    expect(message).toContain("1-user limit");
+    expect(message).not.toContain("1 users");
+  });
+
+  /*
+   * The message is shown to a person who is being told no. It must not read
+   * like a bug, so it always states both halves of the arithmetic.
+   */
+  it("states the usage even when it exceeds the limit", () => {
+    const message: string =
+      EnterpriseLicenseSeatsUtil.getSeatLimitReachedMessage({
+        seatsInUse: 212,
+        userLimit: 150,
+      });
+
+    expect(message).toContain("150");
+    expect(message).toContain("212");
+  });
+});