**The billing address was one textarea**, so what landed in it was
whatever somebody typed: a postcode on the street line, a city with no
postcode, no country at all. It is four fields now — street, postcode,
town, country — in the customer's settings and in the console's customer
editor, which had its own free-text copy of the same field and would have
had an operator's correction silently reverted the next time the customer
saved.
`customers.billing_address` is neither dropped nor parsed: guessing which
line of an existing block is the street would put a postcode where a
street belongs on a document nobody can correct afterwards. It becomes the
COMPOSED form, rewritten from the fields on every save, so IssueInvoice
and everything else that reads it keep working, and a record nobody has
re-saved keeps the block it always had.
**The customer type is fixed once it is on record.** It decides the
fourteen-day right of withdrawal, and a business able to set itself to
"Privatperson" on this page is a business able to withdraw from a contract
it may not withdraw from. Registration asks the question; this page
reports the answer, and saveProfile refuses to answer it a second time —
in the component, not by hiding a radio, because a form that hides a
control has never stopped anybody who can post to /livewire/update. A
record created before the question existed may still be given one, once.
The panel is a fact rather than a form now, which is also what was odd
about it, and the sentence about who has the right of withdrawal is gone.
**Cancelling asks why.** A reason from a fixed list, required, with a note
beside it that "Sonstiges" cannot go without — the one fact worth having
about a departure, asked at the only moment the customer is looking at the
question. It lands on the contract (`cancel_reason`, `cancel_reason_note`).
And where the fourteen days are still running, the dialogue offers the
WITHDRAWAL as a way out of itself rather than as one more reason inside
it: withdrawing ends the service the same day and sends the whole amount
back, cancelling keeps the term that was paid for, and somebody entitled
to the first should not lose it by taking the second unasked. A business
is never offered it — WithdrawalRight answers that, not the template.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Three things the product owed its customers and did not have.
**Who is on the other side.** There was no consumer/business flag anywhere,
and `vat_id` was standing in for one — which it cannot: a business without a
VAT number is an ordinary small business, and a consumer with one does not
exist. It is asked at sign-up now, correctable in the portal, and NULL where
nobody has been asked. Unknown is read as CONSUMER everywhere it decides a
right, because that mistake costs us a refund while the other one takes a
statutory right away from somebody who has it.
Reverse charge asks the recorded type instead of the number: an explicit
consumer is charged the domestic rate whatever `vat_id` says — previously they
were not, and anyone could zero their own VAT by getting a number verified. An
unrecorded type still falls back to the verified number, so no contract that is
already running changes rate.
**The fourteen-day right of withdrawal** (FAGG, §312g BGB), for consumers only,
at every door: the window is stamped on the contract when it is concluded, the
customer exercises it from the portal, an operator records one that arrived by
telephone or post, and both go through one action that refuses a business
customer on the server rather than by hiding a card.
The money follows the paperwork rather than being computed beside it. The
invoice is cancelled by a Storno with its own gapless number — nothing is ever
edited or deleted — a new invoice states the pro-rata value of the service
actually delivered (FAGG §16, by days over the term paid for), and the refund
is exactly the difference between the two documents. Where the consumer never
expressly asked for the service to begin at once, they owe nothing and the whole
amount goes back. `StripeClient::refund()` is new, keyed so a retry cannot send
the money twice. The service ends through EndInstanceService and the
`cancellation_scheduled` machinery that was already there.
**The cancel button for modules.** BookAddon::cancelAtPeriodEnd() had no caller
in the interface at all, so a customer could book a recurring charge in two
clicks and had no way to stop it. It is on the module card now, with the date it
runs until and a way back while the cancellation is still pending — and putting
a module back settles nothing, because the term it was cancelled for was paid
for in advance.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Three complaints, one shape: the console knew things and could not act on
them, so the work happened somewhere else and left no trace.
The header said "4 Hinweis(e)" and led nowhere. Whoever read it had to
know that the list was a card further down the same page, and then go
looking for the host or the failed run by hand. The count is a link now,
every notice carries the page that shows the thing it is about, and the
plural is a word rather than a bracket.
Nothing recorded what this installation had sent. "Hat der Kunde die
Zugangsdaten je bekommen, und wann?" was answered on the mail server — a
different machine, a different program, and nothing an operator can put
in front of somebody who says nothing ever arrived. Every mail now writes
a row: when, to whom, which mailable, and the customer it belongs to.
Written from MessageSent, so a row means the transport accepted it; that
is the strongest thing an application can honestly claim, and a column
called "delivered" would be pretending otherwise. Verification and reset
mails are left out on purpose — they go to unconfirmed addresses and
anybody who can type into a form can send them, so recording them would
hand the register to whoever wants to fill it.
And the customer list was the end of the road. There is a page behind it
now: what they bought, what they asked in their own words, what we sent
them, and a box to write the next message. It goes out from the support
mailbox and is recorded on the way — with its body, because an operator
typed it and "what exactly did I write to them in March" is a question
the mail server's log cannot answer either. Answering a request from here
closes it, which is the reason to answer from here at all: answering from
a mail client leaves it open for ever, because nothing tells it otherwise.
Found on the way, by a test that sent a real mail rather than asserting it
was queued: resources/views/mail/reset-password.blade.php was missing its
closing </x-mail.layout>. The component's contents were never terminated,
the layout's own @if ran off the end of the file, and the mail raised a
Blade syntax error instead of rendering. Password reset has therefore
never delivered a link since it was built. Closed, plus a test that
renders it and one that counts opening against closing tags across every
mail view.
Reading INCOMING mail in the console is not in this: it needs the mailbox
polled over IMAP, which is a credential and a dependency. Requests filed
through the portal appear here in full; a customer who writes by mail
instead still has to be read in the mail client.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The rule was decided in CustomDomainAccess but nothing asked it on the way
in: /domain answered every customer on every package, so the entry package
could set a domain it is not sold and cannot keep.
The guard sits in mount(), not on the route. A Livewire component answers
POSTs to /livewire/update by itself, so a route-only check would have left
save() and the rest reachable to exactly the customers it was meant to stop.
The sidebar asks the same question through a gate rather than a second copy
of the rule — a customer holds no permissions at all (R21 puts all seventeen
on the operator guard), so can() had nothing to filter on and the tab was
shown to everyone, leading straight into the 403 the page now raises.
Customer::forUser() carries the resolution the Livewire concern used to own,
because the gate has to answer outside any component and a second copy of
its email fallback is how the two would drift apart.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The three sites that refuse to create or rename an operator onto a
customer's email (Admin\Settings::saveAccount(), ::inviteStaff(), and
clupilot:create-operator) all checked Customer::where('email', ...) as
a proxy for "does this address already have a portal login". A users
row with no matching customers row — an email changed on one side
only, or legacy/orphaned data — passed straight through: this dev
database already had one.
Extracted the three copies into Customer::emailTaken(), which checks
both tables directly, so the three sites cannot drift from each other
again.
Customer::ensureUser() enforced uniqueness only within users, so a
customer provisioned (or registering publicly) with an operator's email
got a second, colliding identity for the same address — the exact thing
R21 exists to prevent. Checks Operator by address now, not by session
(the deleted assertNotAdmin() checked who was signed in, which could
never be the right question).
Public registration gets the same guard via a plain unique() validation
rule, reusing Laravel's stock "already taken" message rather than a
dedicated one — naming the collision specifically would tell a public
visitor an address belongs to staff, a worse leak than the generic
refusal every other collision here already gives them.
Impersonation answers 409 instead of crashing into it. The Stripe
webhook keeps recording the paid order (same principle as
openContract()'s own comment: the order is proof money changed hands)
and withholds only the colliding login, logged for an operator to
resolve by hand.
Verified the reverse direction Codex flagged as already covered: two
Admin\Settings actions and the clupilot:create-operator command all
already refuse an operator email that collides with a customer's, and
that check is sound today because every users row is created in
lockstep with a customers row of the same email (CreateNewUser and
ensureUser are the only two creation sites, both confirmed by grep) and
nothing in this app can change a user's email afterwards (Fortify's
updateProfileInformation feature is disabled, and no other code calls
that action).
It checked Auth::guard('operator')->check() instead of the users row it
was handed, so with an operator's own session still attached (shared
mode carries the same cookie through both legs of impersonation) it
threw the moment a customer's email already had a users row — a 500 on
the first impersonation of anyone who had signed into the portal
themselves. Deleting it rather than fixing the check: operators live in
`operators` now, never in `users` (R21), so a users row can no longer
BE an operator account for this to guard against. Also drops the dead
`'is_admin' => false` write — the column reads from nowhere any more.
A verifier that returns the number in display form ("DE 811 907 980") would
have failed the comparison against the normalised current value and silently
switched a genuine reverse-charge customer back to domestic VAT. Both sides are
normalised now, and vat_id_verified_at is a real datetime rather than a string.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A timestamp alone said "some number was checked once": editing the field left
it intact, so a customer could swap a verified foreign VAT ID for any
plausible-looking one and keep zero-VAT pricing. The verified value is stored
and compared, which makes the rule self-enforcing — no writer has to remember
to clear a flag, and there are several writers.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Any non-empty string starting with two characters other than AT switched the
customer to reverse charge — typing "XX123" was a 20 % discount. Reverse charge
now requires a VAT ID that is verified, belongs to an EU member state other than
ours, and looks like a VAT number at all. Unverified is the normal state and
means the domestic rate: over-collecting is correctable, under-collecting is a
tax liability.
Changing the number clears its verification. Verification itself (VIES) is not
built yet, so reverse charge stays off until someone confirms a number — which
is the safe direction to be wrong in.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- 5 operator roles (Owner/Admin/Support/Billing/Read-only) seeded via migration
with a capability catalogue; app checks capabilities via Gate, never role names
- every mutating admin action authorizes server-side (hosts/datacenters/customers/
impersonate/provisioning); is_admin reads migrated to console.view / isOperator()
- admin /settings: own account + Owner-only staff invite/role/revoke with
last-owner, self-role and customer-collision guards (transactional)
- sidebar 'zum Kundenportal' link replaced with Settings
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- customers gain profile + branding + closed_at; instances gain cancellation
fields; branding resolver (NULL -> CluPilot defaults) snapshotted into the
provisioning run context
- cancel package: term-end, irreversible, typed-confirm modal (R5)
- close account: guarded (no active package), typed-confirm modal (R5)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
nexxo