Files
llmx/codex-cli/tests/approvals.test.ts
autotaker ca7ab76569 feat: add user-defined safe commands configuration and approval logic #380 (#386)
This pull request adds a feature that allows users to configure
auto-approved commands via a `safeCommands` array in the configuration
file.

## Related Issue
#380 

## Changes
- Added loading and validation of the `safeCommands` array in
`src/utils/config.ts`
- Implemented auto-approval logic for commands matching `safeCommands`
prefixes in `src/approvals.ts`
- Added test cases in `src/tests/approvals.test.ts` to verify
`safeCommands` behavior
- Updated documentation with examples and explanations of the
configuration
2025-04-18 22:35:32 -07:00

122 lines
3.4 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
import type { SafetyAssessment } from "../src/approvals";
import { canAutoApprove } from "../src/approvals";
import { describe, test, expect, vi } from "vitest";
vi.mock("../src/utils/config", () => ({
loadConfig: () => ({
safeCommands: ["npm test", "sl"],
}),
}));
describe("canAutoApprove()", () => {
const env = {
PATH: "/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin",
HOME: "/home/user",
};
const writeablePaths: Array<string> = [];
const check = (command: ReadonlyArray<string>): SafetyAssessment =>
canAutoApprove(command, "suggest", writeablePaths, env);
test("simple safe commands", () => {
expect(check(["ls"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "List directory",
group: "Searching",
runInSandbox: false,
});
expect(check(["cat", "file.txt"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "View file contents",
group: "Reading files",
runInSandbox: false,
});
expect(check(["pwd"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "Print working directory",
group: "Navigating",
runInSandbox: false,
});
});
test("simple safe commands within a `bash -lc` call", () => {
expect(check(["bash", "-lc", "ls"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "List directory",
group: "Searching",
runInSandbox: false,
});
expect(check(["bash", "-lc", "ls $HOME"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "List directory",
group: "Searching",
runInSandbox: false,
});
expect(check(["bash", "-lc", "git show ab9811cb90"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "Git show",
group: "Using git",
runInSandbox: false,
});
});
test("bash -lc commands with unsafe redirects", () => {
expect(check(["bash", "-lc", "echo hello > file.txt"])).toEqual({
type: "ask-user",
});
// In theory, we could make our checker more sophisticated to auto-approve
// This previously required approval, but now that we consider safe
// operators like "&&" the entire expression can be autoapproved.
expect(check(["bash", "-lc", "ls && pwd"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "List directory",
group: "Searching",
runInSandbox: false,
});
});
test("true command is considered safe", () => {
expect(check(["true"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "Noop (true)",
group: "Utility",
runInSandbox: false,
});
});
test("commands that should require approval", () => {
// Should this be on the auto-approved list?
expect(check(["printenv"])).toEqual({ type: "ask-user" });
expect(check(["git", "commit"])).toEqual({ type: "ask-user" });
expect(check(["pytest"])).toEqual({ type: "ask-user" });
expect(check(["cargo", "build"])).toEqual({ type: "ask-user" });
});
test("commands in safeCommands config should be safe", async () => {
expect(check(["npm", "test"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "User-defined safe command",
group: "User config",
runInSandbox: false,
});
expect(check(["sl"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "User-defined safe command",
group: "User config",
runInSandbox: false,
});
expect(check(["npm", "test", "--watch"])).toEqual({
type: "auto-approve",
reason: "User-defined safe command",
group: "User config",
runInSandbox: false,
});
});
});