build: /audit-feature user-preferences

.sdlc/features/user-preferences/audit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+# Security Audit: User Preferences API
+
+## Summary
+**Overall Assessment: PASS**
+
+The User Preferences API feature has a small, well-contained attack surface. The implementation follows defensive coding practices: parameterized SQL queries, allowlist-based input validation, and proper error mapping. No critical or high severity findings were identified. Two medium findings and two low/informational findings are noted below.
+
+## Static Analysis Results
+
+| Tool | Result |
+|------|--------|
+| `go vet ./...` | PASS - no warnings or errors |
+| `golangci-lint` | Not available in environment (not installed) |
+
+## OWASP Assessment
+
+| Category | Status | Notes |
+|----------|--------|-------|
+| **A01 - Broken Access Control** | ADVISORY | No authentication or authorization on endpoints. Spec explicitly marks auth as out-of-scope, expecting upstream gateway enforcement. See Medium Finding #1. |
+| **A02 - Cryptographic Failures** | PASS | No cryptographic operations. No sensitive data stored (theme, language, notifications only). |
+| **A03 - Injection** | PASS | All SQL queries use parameterized placeholders (`$1`, `$2`, `$3`). JSONB values marshaled by `encoding/json` and passed as parameters. No string concatenation in queries. |
+| **A04 - Insecure Design** | PASS | Hexagonal architecture with clean separation of concerns. Domain validation via allowlists. Deep merge logic is well-tested. |
+| **A05 - Security Misconfiguration** | PASS | `.env.example` has `APP_DEBUG=true` and `AUTH_ENABLED=false` but these are example/development defaults, not production config. `.env` files are gitignored. |
+| **A06 - Vulnerable Components** | PASS | Uses standard library and well-maintained dependencies (`chi`, `uuid`, `sqlx`). No known vulnerabilities in deps used by this feature. |
+| **A07 - Auth Failures** | ADVISORY | Auth is opt-in and not enabled for preference routes. Intentional per spec - see Medium Finding #1. |
+| **A08 - Data Integrity** | PASS | All preference values validated against allowlists before persistence. `theme` restricted to `light/dark/system`, `digest` to `daily/weekly/never`, `language` must be non-empty. |
+| **A09 - Logging & Monitoring** | PASS | Successful updates are logged with `user_id`. Errors bubble through `app.Wrap()` which handles error logging. No PII is logged (user_id is a UUID, not a name/email). |
+| **A10 - SSRF** | PASS | No outbound HTTP requests. No user-controlled URLs. Service only communicates with PostgreSQL. |
+
+## Critical Findings
+None.
+
+## High Findings
+None.
+
+## Medium Findings
+
+### M1: No Authentication or Authorization on Endpoints
+**Severity:** Medium
+**Location:** `internal/api/routes.go:29-30`
+**Description:** Both GET and PUT preference endpoints are publicly accessible without authentication. Any caller can read or modify any user's preferences by knowing their UUID.
+**Mitigating Factors:** The spec explicitly declares auth as out-of-scope. The design document states this service is a backend store, not a user-facing endpoint, with upstream services/gateways expected to enforce authorization. UUIDs are not guessable.
+**Recommendation:** When this service is exposed beyond internal networks, add `auth.Middleware()` to the preference route group. Consider adding authorization checks to ensure the authenticated user matches the `user_id` path parameter.
+
+### M2: No Request Body Size Limit Explicitly Configured
+**Severity:** Medium
+**Location:** `cmd/server/main.go`, `internal/api/routes.go`
+**Description:** There is no explicit request body size limit configured for the PUT endpoint. While the framework likely has a default, a very large malicious JSON payload could consume memory.
+**Mitigating Factors:** The `app.BindAndValidate()` function and the framework's default body limits likely cap this. The strict JSON binding with `validate:"required"` also limits accepted fields.
+**Recommendation:** Consider adding an explicit `http.MaxBytesReader` or framework-level body size limit (e.g., 64KB would be more than sufficient for preference payloads).
+
+## Low/Informational Findings
+
+### L1: `.env.example` Contains Development Credentials
+**Severity:** Low
+**Location:** `.env.example:18,21`
+**Description:** The `.env.example` file contains `JWT_SECRET=dev-secret-change-in-production` and `DATABASE_URL` with default dev credentials (`dev:dev`). These are clearly marked as development values and `.env` files are properly gitignored.
+**Mitigating Factors:** This is a `.env.example` template, not an actual `.env` file. The `.gitignore` properly excludes `.env`, `.env.local`, and `*.env`.
+**Recommendation:** No action required. The naming convention is clear.
+
+### L2: Language Field Validation is Minimal
+**Severity:** Low
+**Location:** `internal/domain/preferences.go:58-60`
+**Description:** The `language` field only validates that it's non-empty. It does not validate against the BCP 47 standard referenced in the spec. While this is not a security vulnerability, it allows arbitrary string values.
+**Mitigating Factors:** The value is stored in a JSONB column and never used in SQL construction, templates, or URL building. The risk is limited to data quality, not security.
+**Recommendation:** Consider adding BCP 47 format validation if language values are used in locale-sensitive operations downstream.
+
+## Recommendations
+
+1. **Before production deployment:** Add authentication middleware to the preference route group and implement authorization checks to verify the requesting user matches the `user_id` in the path.
+2. **Optional hardening:** Add explicit request body size limits for the PUT endpoint.
+3. **Data quality:** Consider BCP 47 validation for the language field if used for locale operations.
+4. **No immediate action required** - the current implementation is secure for its intended use as an internal backend service with external auth enforcement.

.sdlc/features/user-preferences/manifest.yaml

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ phase_history:
       entered: 2026-02-09T02:45:34.10464457Z
 artifacts:
     audit:
-        status: pending
+        status: passed
         path: audit.md
     design:
         status: approved

.sdlc/state.yaml

@@ -6,9 +6,9 @@ active_work:
         - slug: user-preferences
           phase: review
 blocked: []
-last_updated: 2026-02-09T02:45:34.105623962Z
+last_updated: 2026-02-09T02:47:26.239831583Z
-last_action: TRANSITION
+last_action: PASS_ARTIFACT
-last_actor: cli
+last_actor: user
 history:
     - timestamp: 2026-02-09T02:15:19.934883983Z
       action: CREATE_FEATURE
@@ -105,3 +105,8 @@ history:
       feature: user-preferences
       actor: cli
       result: success
+    - timestamp: 2026-02-09T02:47:26.239830501Z
+      action: PASS_ARTIFACT
+      feature: user-preferences
+      actor: user
+      result: success