Skip to main content

Testing guide

Tests are first-class. The PR merge gate is ≥ 80 % line coverage on changed code and all E2E core scenarios green. This page walks the layout, the harness pattern, and the adversarial-input rules that catch the bugs static analysis cannot.

Audience

All contributors. Apply on every PR that touches apps/backend/ or apps/frontend/.

Backend — pytest​

Tests live in apps/backend/tests/ and split into three tiers:

apps/backend/tests/
├── unit/             # pure-function tests, no DB, no network
├── integration/      # FastAPI TestClient + Postgres (testcontainers)
└── e2e/              # backend-only black-box flows; not the Playwright suite

conftest.py at each level exposes the right fixtures. The top-level conftest.py provides the cross-tier helpers (factories, time freezing).

Run a focused set​

cd apps/backend

# Whole suite
pytest -q

# Single tier
pytest -q tests/unit

# By keyword
pytest -q -k "api_key and revoke"

# Single test, with prints
pytest -s tests/integration/test_api_key_endpoints.py::test_revoke_immediate

Coverage​

pytest --cov=. --cov-report=term-missing --cov-report=xml

Aim for ≥ 80 % line coverage on changed lines. The CI coverage diff job reports the per-file delta; hovering coverage at 79 % blocks merge.

Layout rule of thumb​

  • Unit: the function under test takes no database, no HTTP, no Celery. Mock at the boundary.
  • Integration: the route is exercised end-to-end via FastAPI TestClient, with a real PostgreSQL via pytest-testcontainers. No mocking of SQLAlchemy.
  • E2E (backend): drives the API as a black box using HTTPX, with the worker actually running in another fixture. Used sparingly — Playwright is the primary E2E.

Frontend — Playwright with the PortalPage harness​

apps/frontend/tests/_harness/PortalPage.ts defines a domain-language Page Object. Test code never calls page.click(...) directly.

Why the harness​

Tests phrased in domain verbs survive UI churn. The same scenario reads:

// ❌ brittle — breaks when the modal markup changes
await page.click("button:has-text('New API key')");
await page.fill("input[name='label']", "ci-runner");
await page.click("button:has-text('Create')");

// ✅ stable — speaks the product's language
await portal.createApiKey({ label: "ci-runner", scope: "team", expiryDays: 90 });

Add a verb to the harness​

When you add a new screen or a new flow, add a verb to PortalPage first, then write the scenario:

// apps/frontend/tests/_harness/PortalPage.ts
async createApiKey(opts: { label: string; scope: ApiKeyScope; expiryDays: number }) {
  await this.page.getByRole("button", { name: "New API key" }).click();
  await this.page.getByLabel("Label").fill(opts.label);
  await this.page.getByLabel("Scope").selectOption(opts.scope);
  await this.page.getByLabel("Expiry").selectOption(`${opts.expiryDays}d`);
  await this.page.getByRole("button", { name: "Create" }).click();
  return this.captureKeyFromOneTimeRevealModal();
}

The harness has ~17 verbs today; a contributor reading PortalPage.ts should be able to retell the product's user journey.

Run​

cd apps/frontend
npm run test:e2e          # all scenarios
npm run test:e2e -- --grep "api keys"   # filtered
npm run test:e2e:headed   # visible browser, useful when debugging

The dev stack must be up (docker-compose -f docker-compose.dev.yml up -d) before E2E runs.

Adversarial input — parametrize is mandatory​

Any code that parses untrusted input must be exercised against a parametrized matrix of adversarial cases. The portal has been bitten by this before — chore PR #7's recursive normalize_spdx_id was 88 % covered and still admitted a DoS via separator-only tokens.

Surfaces in scope​

  • Registry metadata parsers (packages/, npm, pypi, cargo, go.mod).
  • Webhook URL / payload parsers (GitHub, GitLab, Slack, Teams).
  • SPDX / CycloneDX expression normalisers.
  • OAuth state and code parsers.
  • Anywhere user content is interpolated into a regex, a path, or a shell.

The matrix​

For each surface, parametrize over at minimum these adversarial inputs:

ClassExamples
Separator-only tokens"AND", "OR", "WITH", "OR OR OR", " "
Scheme abuse"javascript:alert(1)", "file:///etc/passwd", "data:text/html,..."
Oversized1 MiB string, 65 535 nested parens, 10 000-char URL
Control bytesCRLF ("\r\n"), null byte ("\x00"), BOM ("")
Unicode tricksRTL override ("‮"), homoglyph ("аpple" Cyrillic), zero-width ("​")
Empty / whitespace"", " ", "\t\n"

Use pytest.mark.parametrize and label each case so failure messages are diagnostic:

@pytest.mark.parametrize(
    "raw,expected",
    [
        pytest.param("MIT AND Apache-2.0", ["MIT", "Apache-2.0"], id="happy-path"),
        pytest.param("AND", [], id="separator-only-token"),
        pytest.param("javascript:alert(1)", [], id="scheme-abuse"),
        pytest.param("(" * 10_000 + "MIT" + ")" * 10_000, ["MIT"], id="deep-nesting"),
        pytest.param("MIT\r\nApache-2.0", ["MIT", "Apache-2.0"], id="crlf-injection"),
        pytest.param("MIT\x00Apache-2.0", ["MIT"], id="null-byte"),
    ],
)
def test_normalize_spdx_id(raw: str, expected: list[str]) -> None:
    assert normalize_spdx_id(raw) == expected

Adversarial parametrize is not a substitute for fuzzing — it complements it. We rely on parametrize for regression-pinning the cases we already know about.

Hardening rules — what the 2026-06 validation campaign taught us​

An external verification team executed 1,360 guide-derived cases against the live portal and surfaced 70 unique defects that our unit / functional / e2e suites — all green — had missed. The post-mortem traced them to a handful of structural blind spots; each rule below closes one and names the defect class that proved it. These rules are binding for new PRs (they mirror CLAUDE.md §2).

1. Security assertions are permission × state matrices​

We had an "other team → 404" test and a "terminal → 409" test — but never their cross product, and a real leak lived exactly at that intersection (a non-member probing another team's finished scan got a 409 that confirmed it existed). The permission denial (404 existence-hide / 403) must always fire before any state-derived 409. New 409 surfaces add a case to apps/backend/tests/integration/test_existence_hide_state_matrix.py.

2. Duplicated vocabularies require a contract test​

When the same closed vocabulary lives in two places — a DB enum and a dispatcher catalog, an emitter and an advertised list, a backend enum and a frontend mirror constant — per-module tests stay green while the pair drifts (the notification-kind drift sat dormant until the approval trigger was wired). Import both sides and assert set equality: apps/backend/tests/unit/test_catalog_contracts.py is the pattern.

3. Persistence-boundary tests use recorded real tool output​

Hand-built minimal fixtures are too clean. A real container image carries several CVEs per package as the norm, and the container-scan persist bug lived exactly in that density — our one-CVE-per-package fixtures could never reach it. Record real tool output (tests/fixtures/trivy/) and derive expected counts from the fixture so re-recording never breaks assertions.

4. The docs are an oracle​

34 of the 70 findings were guide–implementation mismatches — invisible to code-derived tests by construction, because the code is self-consistently wrong. Every documented promise (a status code, a CLI command, a config key) gets a docs-uat assertion or a guard test as part of the feature's DoD.

5. Lifecycle sequences are a test category​

Single-operation tests passed while revoke → re-register was a permanent 409 (the unique constraint counted revoked rows). Create → revoke → re-create, archive → restore → use: test the sequence, not just each verb.

Two regression nets, on purpose​

tests/verify-specs/ vendors the verification team's deterministic spec modules (see its PROVENANCE.md) and runs them nightly (verify-specs-nightly.yml) against a freshly seeded stack. That nightly is our internal regression net — it does not replace the verification team's independent Tier-3 re-verification, whose value is precisely that the oracle is not ours.

Coverage gate — concrete​

The merge gate is enforced in .github/workflows/ci.yml:

  • Unit + integration combined: ≥ 80 % line coverage on changed lines.
  • E2E (Playwright): core scenarios in apps/frontend/tests/e2e/_core/ must all pass. New core scenarios are added with the relevant feature.

CI publishes the coverage report as a PR comment; hovering at 79.x % blocks merge until you add tests.

See also​