Is it possible to check how many posts a user already have associated to them, and if that count exceeds a certain limit, then invalidate the request to create a new post?
I was thinking about having some basic settings at: /settings/limits/posts = 5.
And in the rules have something like:
".write": "root.child('settings/limits/posts').val() <= root.child('users/' + auth.id + 'posts').numChildren()"
That doesn't work, because numChildren isn't available. So how do you do such a check?
The only solution I've come up with, is to have a external server to do a count of a user's existing posts and only allow the server to write new posts.
Anybody else got any suggestions?
Related
I have a Firebase project where I'd like for users to be able to see when other users created their profiles. My initial hope was that I could use "user.metadata.creationTime" on the frontend to pass the date into the user's extra info document and verify that it is correct by having "request.resource.data.datecreated == request.auth.metadata.creationTime" as a Database Rule, but it looks like it is not possible according to the documentation.
Is there any way I can verify that the creation date is correct on the backend?
More info edit: Below is the code that is being triggered when a user creates a new account on my profile. The three values are displayed publicly. I'm creating a niche gear for sale page so being able to see when a user first created their account could be helpful when deciding if a seller is sketchy. I don't want someone to be able to make it seem like they have been around for longer than they have been.
db.collection('users').doc(user.uid).set({
username: "Username-156135",
bio: "Add a bio",
created: user.metadata.creationTime
});
Firestore rules:
match /users/{id} {
allow get;
allow create, update: if request.resource.data.username is string &&
request.resource.data.bio is string &&
request.resource.data.created == request.auth.metadata.creationTime;
}
user.metadata.creationTime, according to the API documentation is a string with no documented format. I suggest not using it. In fact, what you're trying to do seems impossible since that value isn't available in the API documentation for request.auth.
What I suggest you do instead is use a Firebase Auth onCreate trigger with Cloud Functions to automatically create that document with the current time as a proper timestamp. Then, in security rules, I wouldn't even give the user the ability to change that field, so you can be sure it was only ever set accurately by the trigger. You might be interested in this solution overall.
I'm building a very simple JavaScript-based Firebase app that increments a key's value by 1 whenever my webpage is loaded. I don't want any authentication friction, so want to use either an open database, or one restricted to anonymous authentications. So, for example's sake:
$(document).ready(function() {
// after config and initialize...
var fb = firebase.database();
var fbCount = fb.ref("count");
fbCount.transaction(function(current) {
return current + 1;
});
});
In either case, as I understand it, there is nothing to stop anyone who can access the page from copying my code (including my initialization config) and using it on their own server--with adjustments--to not only increment the value (fbCount above), but to change the code in any other way they like (e.g. letting them increment the value by 100, 1000, or changing it to something else entirely).
My further understanding is that the best way to deal with this potential is through security rules. So what I'm trying to figure out is whether there's a way, through the security rules, to limit any write to only an increment by 1 of the current value?
If not, is there another method I should be investigating?
You'll want to make use of predefined variables. Your validation rule will look something like this (at the location of the field you want to protect):
".validate": "newData.val() == data.val() + 1"
This is more of a theoretical how database should be setup, and less about programming.
Lets say I have a news feed full of cards, which each contain a message and a like count. Each user is able to like a mesesage. I want it to be displayed to a user if they have already liked that particular card. (The same way you can see the post you like on facebook, even if you come back days later)
How would you implement that with this Firestore type database? Speed is definitely a concern..
storying it locally isn't an option, my guess would be on each card object, you would have to reference a collection that just kept a list of people who liked it. The only thing is that is a lot more querying.. which feels like it would be slow..
is there a better way to do this?
TL;DR
This approach requires more to setup, ie a cron service, knowledge of Firestore Security Rules and Cloud Functions for Firebase. With that said, the following is the best approach I've come up with. Please note, only pseudo-rules that are required are shown.
Firestore structure with some rules
/*
allow read
allow update if auth.uid == admin_uid and the
admin is updating total_likes ...
*/
messages/{message_key} : {
total_likes: <int>,
other_field:
[,...]
}
/*allow read
allow write if newData == {updated: true} and
docId exists under /messages
*/
messages_updated/{message_key} : {
updated: true
}
/*
allow read
allow create if auth.uid == liker_uid && !counted && !delete and
liker_uid/message_key match those in the docId...
allow update if auth.uid == admin_uid && the admin is
toggling counted from false -> true ...
allow update if auth.uid == liker_uid && the liker is
toggling delete ...
allow delete if auth.uid == admin_uid && delete == true and
counted == true
*/
likes/{liker_uid + '#' + message_key} : {
liker_uid:,
message_key:,
counted: <bool>,
delete: <bool>,
other_field:
[,...]
}
count_likes/{request_id}: {
message_key:,
request_time: <timestamp>
}
Functions
Function A
Triggered every X minutes to count message likes for potentially all messages.
query /messages_updated for BATCH_SIZE docs
for each, set its docId to true in a local object.
go to step 1 if BATCH_SIZE docs were retrieved (there's more to read in)
for each message_key in local object, add to /count_likes a doc w/ fields request_time and message_key.
Function B
Triggered onCreate of count_likes/{request_id}
Delete created docs message_key from /messages_updated.
let delta_likes = 0
query /likes for docs where message_key == created docs message_key and where counted == false.
for each, try to update counted to true (in parallel, not atomically)
if successful, increment delta_likes by 1.
query /likes for docs where message_key == created docs message_key, where delete == true and where counted == true.
for each doc, try to delete it (in parallel, not atomically)
if successful, decrement delta_likes by 1
if delta_likes != 0, transact the total likes for this message under
/messages by delta_likes.
delete this doc from /count_likes.
Function C (optional)
Triggered every Y minutes to delete /count_likes requests that were never met.
query docs under /count_likes that have request_time older than Z.
for each doc, delete it.
On the client
to see if you liked a message, query under /likes for a doc where liker_uid equals your uid, where message_key equals the message's key and where delete == false. if a doc exists, you have liked it.
to like a message, batch.set a like under /likes and batch.set a /messages_updated. if this batch fails, try a batch_two.update on the like by updating its delete field to false and batch_two.set its /messages_updated.
to unlike a message, batch.update on the like by updating its delete field to true and batch.set its /messages_updated.
Pros of this approach
this can be extended to counters for other things, not just messages.
a user can see if they've liked something.
a user can only like something once.
a user can spam toggle a like button and this still works.
any user can see who's liked what message by querying /likes by message_key.
any user can see all the messages any user has liked by querying /likes by liker_uid.
only a cloud function admin updates your like counts.
if a function is fired multiple times for the same event, this function is safe, meaning like counts will not be incremented multiple times for the same like.
if a function is not fired for some event, this approach still works. It just means that the count will not update until the next time someone else likes the same message.
likes are denormalized to only one root level collection, instead of the two that would be required if you had the like under the the message's likes subcollection and under the liker's messages_liked subcollection.
like counts for each message are updated in batches, ie if something has been liked 100 times, only 1 transaction of 100 is required, not 100 transactions of 1. this reduces write rate conflicts due to like counter transactions significantly.
Cons of this approach
Counts are only updated however often your cron job fires.
Relies on a cron service to fire and in general there's just more to set up.
Requires the function to authenticate with limited privileges to perform secure writes under /likes. In the Realtime Database this is possible. In Firestore, it's possible, but a bit hacky. If you can wait and don't want to use the hacky approach, use the regular unrestricted admin in development until Firestore supports authenticating with limited privileges.
May be costly depending on your standpoint. There are function invocations and read/write counts you should think about.
Things to consider
When you transact the count in Function B, you may want to consider trying this multiple times in case the max write rate of 1/sec is exceeded and the transaction fails.
In Function B, you may want to implement batch reading like in Function A if you expect to be counting a lot of likes per message.
If you need to update anything else periodically for the message (in another cron job), you may want to consider merging that function into Function B so the write rate of 1/sec isn't exceeded.
This talk mentions time-expiring data using Firebase rules at 22:55
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUBnlbjZFAI
How can one do this ?
I didn't find any information regarding this.
I recommend two solutions.
1) Use cloud functions to record a message path and the date it was posted. Then every hour sort that list by date, pick all the expired ones, and create a deep update object to null out every expired message. Nowadays you can use Cron Scheduler to handle the periodic flush.
2) Make a rule that says anyone can delete expired messages and make it so that clients automatically delete expired messages when they are in a chat room.
Written here: https://firebase.google.com/docs/database/security/securing-data
You can't have it auto delete your data but you can make them unreadable (which is the same thing from the user standpoint). Just send a timestamp child field with you data and check against it.
{
"rules": {
"messages": {
"$message": {
// only messages from the last ten minutes can be read
".read": "data.child('timestamp').val() > (now - 600000)",
// new messages must have a string content and a number timestamp
".validate": "newData.hasChildren(['content', 'timestamp']) && newData.child('content').isString() && newData.child('timestamp').isNumber()"
}
}
}
}
Same question here.
You can't do it using firebase rules. You should either have a NodeJS backend removing your old data or clients doing it for you. For example, before a client retrieves data, he could remove old data.
What's happening is that usually the first time I authenticate a user after enough time has passed that the session has expired my requests for data that the user should have access to are denied. The requests will start working eventually with no actual rules or code changing. It can take from 2 to 10 minutes but will eventually right itself.
I don't have hard data on this; it's just something I've observed.
I have no idea what I can do about this. Is anyone else seeing this? Is this a known bug? I've search but haven't found any other accounts of this happening.
Thanks.
here are the rules:
{
"rules": {
"users": {
"$user": {
".read" :"$user == auth.id || data.child('email').val() == auth.email",
".write":"$user == auth.id"
}
},
"todos":{
"$list":{
".read":"data.child('members').hasChild(auth.id)",
".write":"newData.child('members').hasChild(auth.id)"
}
}
}
}
By default, your auth tokens live for 24 hours, so if you're seeing security errors before then, it's probably not related to your session. To verify this, you can attach a callback to tell you when your session has expired. See:
https://www.firebase.com/docs/javascript/firebase/auth.html
I suspect what's going on here is simply that the data your rules are depending on is changing and causing writes to succeed some times, and fail others. This is the intended behavior of Security Rules in Firebase. For example, if someone was added / removed from /todos/blah/members/ it would affect your ability to read at /todos/blah
One odd thing about your rules is that you appear to be allowing anyone to write to /todos/$list as long as the data they are writing contains a member list that contains the writer's user id. I suspect this is not your intended behavior. Perhaps you meant to make the write rules depend on the data that was already in Firebase rather than new data?