Since we're not doing refresh tokens any more, we should start killing off the
dead code paths. /tokenrefresh itself is a bit of a thornier subject, since
there might be apps out there using it, but we can at least not generate
refresh tokens on new logins.
This doesn't cover *all* of the registration flows, but it does cover the most
common ones: in particular: shared_secret registration, appservice
registration, and normal user/pass registration.
Pull device_id from the registration parameters. Register the device in the
devices table. Associate the device with the returned access and refresh
tokens. Profit.
* `RegistrationHandler.appservice_register` no longer issues an access token:
instead it is left for the caller to do it. (There are two of these, one in
`synapse/rest/client/v1/register.py`, which now simply calls
`AuthHandler.issue_access_token`, and the other in
`synapse/rest/client/v2_alpha/register.py`, which is covered below).
* In `synapse/rest/client/v2_alpha/register.py`, move the generation of
access_tokens into `_create_registration_details`. This means that the normal
flow no longer needs to call `AuthHandler.issue_access_token`; the
shared-secret flow can tell `RegistrationHandler.register` not to generate a
token; and the appservice flow continues to work despite the above change.
This is meant to be an *almost* non-functional change, with the exception that
it fixes what looks a lot like a bug in that it only calls
`auth_handler.add_threepid` and `add_pusher` once instead of three times.
The idea is to move the generation of the `access_token` out of
`registration_handler.register`, because `access_token`s now require a
device_id, and we only want to generate a device_id once registration has been
successful.
This tracks data about the entity which made the request. This is
instead of passing around a tuple, which requires call-site
modifications every time a new piece of optional context is passed
around.
I tried to introduce a User object. I gave up.
This follows the same flows-based flow as regular registration, but as
the only implemented flow has no requirements, it auto-succeeds. In the
future, other flows (e.g. captcha) may be required, so clients should
treat this like the regular registration flow choices.
A couple of weird caveats:
* If we can't validate your macaroon, we fall back to checking that
your access token is in the DB, and ignoring the failure
* Even if we can validate your macaroon, we still have to hit the DB to
get the access token ID, which we pretend is a device ID all over the
codebase.
This mostly adds the interesting code, and points out the two pieces we
need to delete (and necessary conditions) in order to fix the above
caveats.
