# Which Problems Are Solved
- The eventstore did not support intentionally overwriting the resource
owner when creating events for aggregates that may be reused across
owners.
- Resource owner handling was implicit and could not be controlled per
command/event type.
- We needed a safe way to distinguish between:
- keeping the existing aggregate owner, and
- explicitly setting a new owner for specific create-like events.
# How the Problems Are Solved
- Introduced a new eventstore command type with an explicit
enforce_owner flag.
- Updated eventstore.commands_to_events and eventstore.push so owner
assignment is now explicit:
- if enforce_owner is true, the command owner is written
- if enforce_owner is false, the existing aggregate owner is retained
when present
- Added EnforceResourceOwnerCommand and wiring so command types can opt
in to enforced owner behavior.
- Wired the new behavior through the v3 eventstore push path, including
compatibility fallback for older command type mapping.
- Added migration/setup changes to register and use the new command type
and SQL functions.
- Added and updated tests for owner overwrite and aggregate ID reuse
scenarios.
# Additional Changes
- Added small migration/setup robustness improvements related to
eventstore setup ordering and helper reuse.
- Added focused test coverage for enforced owner behavior and
sequencing.
- Events that currently allow owner changes (implement
EnforceResourceOwner) are:
- AddedEvent (action)
- GroupAddedEvent
- StartedEvent (idp intent)
- ProjectAddedEvent
- HumanAddedEvent
- HumanRegisteredEvent
- MachineAddedEvent
- CreatedEvent (schema user)
# Additional Context
- Follow-up for eventstore owner-handling correctness in create flows
and aggregate ID reuse cases.
- No additional issue link was attached for this change.
---------
Co-authored-by: abhishek kumar gupta <[email protected]>
<!--
Please inform yourself about the contribution guidelines on submitting a
PR here:
https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#submit-a-pull-request-pr.
Take note of how PR/commit titles should be written and replace the
template texts in the sections below. Don't remove any of the sections.
It is important that the commit history clearly shows what is changed
and why.
Important: By submitting a contribution you agree to the terms from our
Licensing Policy as described here:
https://github.com/zitadel/zitadel/blob/main/LICENSING.md#community-contributions.
-->
One-time recovery codes are a common multi-factor authentication (MFA)
backup method, letting users access their account if they lose other MFA
devices. Support for recovery codes can also reduce support burden for
users locked out of their accounts and provide a more secure and
reliable form of verification than security questions.
# Which Problems Are Solved
Zitadel currently lacks support for recovery codes.
# How the Problems Are Solved
This PR partially addresses recovery code support in Zitadel.
Importantly, it adds recovery codes as a new 2FA `Factor` and an
additional `Check` type for the Session API.
```
Example recovery code flow:
1. User generates N new recovery codes using `POST /v2/users/{user_id}/recovery_codes`
2. Zitadel hashes and stores these codes and returns the un-hashed codes in the response
3. User creates new session with an additional check: `recoveryCode`
4. Code is checked against hash and, if valid, cannot be used again
5. User attempts to adds N more codes using the same endpoint
6. If `remaining_codes + N <= RecoveryCodes->MaxCount` config value, then recovery codes are added in addition to original codes
7. User can remove all recovery codes using `DEL /v2/users/:userId/recovery_codes`
```
This PR adds:
- [x] Session recovery_code check support on `POST+PATCH /v2/sessions`
endpoints
- [x] Adds `mfa_recovery_code_checked_at` column (default null) to
`projections.sessions8` table
- [x] Support for `SECOND_FACTOR_TYPE_RECOVERY_CODES` as available 2FA
method on login policy
- [x] Support for importing recovery codes in /import code
Missing, will _not_ implement in this PR:
- [ ] Admin console support for displaying Recovery Code settings for
user(s)
- [ ] Zitadel Typescript login support for recovery codes
TODO:
- [x] Additional unit and integration tests
- [x] Error translations
# Additional Changes
None
# Additional Context
- Closes#6898
---------
Co-authored-by: Livio Spring <[email protected]>
