I need security rules for my firebase-app.
My Data looks like this
{
owner = "djskjfskdjf",
data = "some data"
}
Collection Path is /Data/
I want that users that are authenticated users can read and create documents in this collection. To edit or delete documents, I want that the uid in the field owner is the same as the request.auth.id.
According to firebase documentation this should work:
service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
match /Data/{document=**} {
allow read, create: if request.auth.uid != null;
allow delete, write: if request.auth.uid == request.resource.data.owner;
}
}
}
But when I try to update a field in simulation it gives me the error:
Error: simulator.rules line [5], column [51]. Property resource is undefined on object.
I hope you can help me with this problem.
If your request isn't sending the all the required fields you're checking in rules, then request.resource.data.owner wont work (like if you are just sending data but not owner with the request).
You should use the below style to match an existing object in the database. It won't matter if the request omits the owner info.
allow delete: if resource.data.owner == request.auth.uid;
Related
I'm writing Firestore security rules for my project. I want to allow users to edit information in their own user page, but not in anyone else's. Right now I don't save userId as a field in each user, only as the reference to the user document. I know how to access fields in each user, but not the reference to them. See picture:
match /Users/{document} {
allow update: if request.auth.uid == userId; //how do I reach the userId without having it as a field
}
I do not want to add userId as a field in each user, there must be an easy way of accessing the path.
As mentioned in the Firestore docs you get the document id from the match query.
In your case this would be document from match /Users/{document}. You could also rename this query to match /Users/{userId} to make it work.
Check the second example in the documentation on using authentication information in security rules:
Another common pattern is to make sure users can only read and write their own data:
service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
// Make sure the uid of the requesting user matches name of the user
// document. The wildcard expression {userId} makes the userId variable
// available in rules.
match /users/{userId} {
allow read, update, delete: if request.auth.uid == userId;
allow create: if request.auth.uid != null;
}
}
}
So in your case that'd be if request.auth.uid == document.
I am attempting to move my Firebase rules from testing where every user could read and write every document to one where only the author can update or delete documents they create.
service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
match /{document=**} {
allow read: if request.auth != null;
allow update, delete: if request.auth != null && request.auth.uid == resource.data.author_uid;
allow create: if request.auth != null;
}
}
}
This set of rules is resulting in a 'Missing or insufficient permissions" error at Firebase init and if I attempt to delete a document. If I go with my original rules then everything works.
allow read, create: if request.auth != null
I do a standard firebase.initializeApp (but dont want to publish my keys here - lets just say the same initialize works with the basic rules and on three other firebase projects I have). The delete call is as follows and works with the simpler rule set as well but not the tighter rules above:
const decrement = firebase.firestore.FieldValue.increment(-1);
firestore.collection('story').doc(storyid).delete().then(function() {
firestore.collection('users').doc(getUserID()).update({
saves: decrement
});
})
(thank to Sam Stern on the FB team for guidance)
First, there was a mistake in the rules description. While request.auth.uid is defined by firebase the resource.data.author_id needs to be defined by the developer on each of their documents. In this case the 'story' document contains a 'creator' property that is the userid of the owner. So the correct variable would be resource.data.creator in the above rules.
In addition its possible to define the documentid as the userid, as is often the case when you are creating a 'user' object for each account in your firebase app. In this case the userId is the same as the documentId so the following rule would control update permissions that only allow the owner of that document to change it.
match /users/{userId} {
// In this scope the "userId" variable is equal to the documentId because of the wildcard declaration {userId}
allow update: if request.auth.uid == userId;
}
This is a followup to this question
Firestore permissions
I'm trying to set rules on my firestore
service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
match /analysis/{analysis} {
allow read, write: if request.auth.uid == resource.data.owner_uid;
}
}
}
My goal is
a. When doing a list operation only those documents belonging to a user are returned
b. only documents a user owns can be read or written by that user.
With the above configuration b. is accomplished.
how do I do accomplish a. ?
Remember that firestore rules are not filters, they're a server-side validation of your queries.
You should always make your queries match your rules, or else you'll get permission errors.
In your case you already made the rule to enforce reading/listing on user owned documents. Now you simply have to make the corresponding query with the right filters :
const userId = firebase.auth().currentUser.uid
db.collection("analysis").where("owner_uid", "==", userId)
Another thing.
With your current rules, your users won't be able to create a new document, only edit an existing one, here are the updated rules to allow that :
allow read: if request.auth.uid == resource.data.owner_uid;
allow write: if request.auth.uid == resource.data.owner_uid
|| request.auth.uid == request.resource.data.owner_uid;
I have a data structure like this (Collections and Documents rather than JSON of course but you get the idea):
{
users: {
user1:{
name: Alice,
groups: {
groupA:{subbed:true},
groupB:{subbed:true}
}
},
user2:{
name: Bob,
groups: {
groupC:{subbed:true},
groupD:{subbed:true}
}
}
}
}
Basically this is registered users IDs and the group IDs that each user is subscribed to. I wanted to write a security rule allowing access to a users profile and sub-collections only if they are the current auth user and, based on my reading of the docs, I thought that a wildcard would achieve this...
match /users/{user=**}{
allow read,write: if user == request.auth.uid;
}
With this in place I can read the user document fine but I get a permissions error when I try and read the groups sub-collection. I can only make it work by matching the sub-collection explicitly...
match /appUsers/{user}{
allow read,write: if user == request.auth.uid;
match /groups/{group}{
allow read,write: if user == request.auth.uid;
}
}
...so my question is, what is the difference between the two examples and what am I misunderstanding about the recursive wildcards? I thought that the {user=**} part of the first example should grant access to the user document and all its sub-collections, sub-sub-collections etc etc ad infinitum (for the authorised user) and should remove the need to write rules specifically for data stored lower down as I have had to do in the second example.
I've only been messing around with Firestore for a short time so this could be a real dumb question :)
Thanks all
The firebase docs are a bit confusing when it comes to using the recursive while card. What I found in testing was that I needed to set two rules to give a user permission to write to the users document and all sub collections (and their sub documents) which is the most logical setup for managing user data.
You must set two rules.
Give user permission to the /users/{userId} document
Give user permission to all sub collections and their sub documents that begin at the /users/{userId} path.
service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
match /users/{userId} {
allow read, write: if request.auth.uid == userId;
}
match /users/{userId}/{document=**} {
allow read, write: if request.auth.uid == userId;
}
}
}
Rules
Sorry about including the images. I couldn't get SO to format them correctly.
I think the problem is that, while you are indeed using the subcollections wildcard =**, you are then allowing permissions only if user == request.auth.uid, so this is what happens (pseudocode):
(when accessing users/aHt3vGtyggD5fgGHJ)
user = 'aHt3vGtyggD5fgGHJ'
user == request.auth.uid? Yes
allow access
(when accessing users/aHt3vGtyggD5fgGHJ/groups/h1s5GDS53)
user = 'aHt3vGtyggD5fgGHJ/groups/h1s5GDS53'
user == request.auth.uid? No
deny access
You have two options: either you do as you've done and explicitly match the subcollection, or use this:
function checkAuthorization(usr) {
return usr.split('/')[0] == request.auth.uid;
}
match /users/{user=**}{
allow read,write: if checkAuthorization(user);
}
(the function must be inside your match /databases/{database}/documents, like your rule)
Let me know if this works :)
Security rules now has version 2.
match/cities/{city}/{document=**} matches documents in any
subcollections as well as documents in the cities collection.
You must opt-in to version 2 by adding rules_version = '2'; at the top
of your security rules.
Recursive wildcards (version 2).
This is what works for me:
rules_version = '2';
service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
// Matches any document in the cities collection as well as any document
// in a subcollection.
match /cities/{city}/{document=**} {
allow read, write: if <condition>;
}
}
}
I'm having a simple collection users, document id is using the uid with name string
I'm using angularfire2 to connect to the collection
this.users = afs.collection<User>('users').valueChanges();
I'm using firebase authentication. When displaying the user id, I get 4NxoeUeB4OXverhHhiw86eKl0Sj1 which match with the user document.
this.afAuth.authState.subscribe(auth => console.log(auth.uid));
I'm trying to add rules for the collection. If I use the rules below, I get error Missing or insufficient permissions.
`service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
match /users/{userId} {
allow read, write: if request.auth.uid == userId;
}
}
}`
If I change the rule to request.auth != null the data is shown.
`service cloud.firestore {
match /databases/{database}/documents {
match /users/{userId} {
allow read, write: if request.auth != null;
}
}
}`
What could I have done wrong? I'm also trying a few different rules eg. resource.data.name != null. It is also not working.
I am testing the rule. The end result I want a readers array field and writers array field so I can try something like request.auth.uid in resource.data.readers to control access to the document
You are trying to get /users/* but you only have access to /users/{yourid}.
You should only retrieve data you have access to, so you need to filter your query even if you actually only have one document.
// either by adding a field in your doc
afs.collection('users', ref => ref.where('id', '==', auth.uid))
// or by getting the document directly
afs.collection('users').doc(auth.uid)
When performing a rules check on a query, Cloud Firestore Security
Rules will check to ensure that the user has access to all results
before executing the query. If a query could return results a user
doesn't have access to, the entire query fails and Firestore returns
an error.
Source : https://cloud.google.com/firestore/docs/security/secure-data#shallow_queries