Registration opened an account that could sign in immediately on an address
nobody had proved was theirs — and anybody can type a stranger's into a
registration form. Both halves were commented out: the Fortify feature and
MustVerifyEmail on the model.
`verified` sits on the whole portal group rather than on the pages that spend
money. An unconfirmed address is not a billing problem to be caught at
checkout; it is an account that may not belong to the person holding it, and
the servers, the users and the backups behind it are worth as much to whoever
typed the address as to whoever owns it.
The mail is a Mailable in this product's design rather than Laravel's
notification, which would arrive with the framework's logo, button and footer
as the first thing anybody ever receives from CluPilot. It also has to leave
through the SYSTEM mailbox like every other account mail, which the
notification path does not do on its own.
The link is signed and expires, and the address is part of what is signed — so
a link issued to a mistyped address stops working the moment the address is
corrected, rather than confirming an address nobody can read. Tests cover the
tampered link, the expired one, the corrected address, and one account trying
to confirm another.
The waiting page is ours (Fortify has views off) and offers the only two things
that move somebody forward: send it again, or sign out and register with the
address they meant. The resend is throttled, because otherwise it is a button
that makes the server send mail to an arbitrary address as fast as it can be
clicked. Somebody already confirmed is redirected away from it — the `verified`
middleware only guards the other direction.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Three gaps, all of the "half-built" kind.
Nobody could change a password. Fortify's updatePasswords feature was switched
off, so an account created with a generated password kept it until someone
opened a shell on the server — including the owner's own. Both settings pages
have the form now, sharing one concern, because two copies of a password rule is
how one of them ends up weaker. It goes through Fortify's own action rather than
hashing here, and the current password is required: an unlocked machine should
not be two keystrokes away from locking its owner out.
The datacenter edit form had no active switch. The column and the scope existed,
and the list page has a toggle — but the form you open to change the thing did
not offer the one lifecycle action a location actually needs. Switching one off
now says what it does NOT do: existing hosts keep running. Once, on the actual
transition, and as the only message — the generic "saved" toast would otherwise
replace it, and an already-inactive location would have announced its own
deactivation every time its name was edited.
The staff table's actions cell is empty for your own row, because you cannot
revoke yourself. With a one-person team the column was therefore always blank
and read as broken rather than as a rule.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
nexxo
Claude