# ADR 0001: Work-order media uses single-org scope (board-aligned)

## Status

**Proposed — awaiting approval** (2026-08-05).

This ADR is **not** self-accepted by the PR author. Approval is required from:

- CODEOWNERS team `@Sea-Haven-Industries/internal-dev` (see `.github/CODEOWNERS`)
- SH-116 product owner

Until approved (or until real tenant enforcement lands), this document records a
**pending** exception request against the hard rule below — it does not waive
the rule on its own.

## Context

SH-116 requires that cross-tenant, unauthorized, and out-of-scope media access
be rejected without metadata disclosure. The repository hard rule
(`ARCHITECTURE_AND_CODE_QUALITY.md` §2) requires **server-derived tenant
scope**: filtering by tenant/customer/owner comes from the authenticated
principal and the data layer, never from client-supplied body/query as the
source of truth.

Verified against the current codebase:

- There is no `TenantId` / `CustomerId` column on `WorkOrder`,
  `WorkOrderAttachments`, or `ApplicationUser`.
- `WorkOrder.Customer` is free-text (`nvarchar`), not a FK.
- JWT issuance (`AuthenticationService.GetToken`) emits only `Name`,
  `NameIdentifier`, `Jti`, and `Role` — no tenant/customer claim.
- Board, search, and detail already treat the deployment as a single
  organization via `ApplyBaseScope` (non-deleted, non-template).

Introducing a multi-tenant key requires product modeling plus a schema
migration, which is out of scope for the SH-116 media contract and blocked by
`AGENTS.md` (no migrations / product behavior without explicit instruction).

## Decision (proposed)

Until real tenant enforcement exists, work-order media authorization matches
the board:

1. **Organization boundary** = `ApplyBaseScope` in the data layer
   (`istemplate != true` and not deleted). Lookups outside that set resolve as
   missing → `NotFound` / null (no disclosure).
2. **Authorization at service entry** from claims: staff roles
   (`Admin`, `Manager`, `Dispatcher`, `Supervisor`) may read/mutate any
   in-org work order; role `User` (technician) only when
   `WorkOrder.AssignTo == actorId`; delete remains staff-only.
3. Scope is never taken from request body or query as the trust source;
   `actorId` and roles come from the authenticated principal.

This is **not** a substitute for SH-116 cross-tenant isolation. It is the
interim behavior while the exception is under review or real tenant keys land.

## Accepted risk (while Proposed / if Accepted)

Any authenticated **staff** principal who knows a numeric work-order id can
read or mutate media for that work order, provided it passes `ApplyBaseScope`.
There is no server-derived tenant/customer boundary separating staff access
across customers. Deleted / template / missing ids are **not** a cross-tenant
test; they only prove the `ApplyBaseScope` filter.

## Consequences

- Tests for deleted, template, and missing work-order ids cover
  `ApplyBaseScope` rejection only — they must not be labeled as SH-116
  cross-tenant coverage.
- Staff org-wide access by numeric id remains intentional and aligned with the
  board for this interim state.
- Merge of PR #47 that relies on this ADR requires either:
  1. formal approval of this ADR by the approvers listed in Status, or
  2. landing of real tenant enforcement (see below).

## Path to real enforcement

Candidate design for the deferred multi-tenant work (tracked in the linked
Jira ticket):

1. **Tenant key** — reuse the existing `Accounts` entity (CRM customer) as the
   customer boundary; add `WorkOrder.AccountId` (FK) and
   `ApplicationUser.AccountId` (or an equivalent membership table).
2. **Claim** — emit a server-derived `account_id` (or equivalent) claim in
   `AuthenticationService.GetToken` from the authenticated user’s account
   membership; never accept account id from body/query as trust source.
3. **Data filter** — extend `ApplyBaseScope` (or a sibling filter) so board,
   detail, search, and media loads restrict by the claim-derived account
   scope; staff may still be broader if product defines org-wide roles, but
   that must be an explicit claims rule, not “any numeric id”.
4. **Backfill** — map free-text `WorkOrder.Customer` strings to `Accounts`
   rows where possible; unresolved rows need a product decision (block,
   orphan bucket, or manual remapping).
5. **Tests** — add true cross-tenant rejection tests (staff/tech of account A
   cannot read or mutate media of a work order owned by account B) with stable
   `NotFound` / `Forbidden` and no metadata disclosure.

## Excepted rule

Hard rule: **server-derived tenant scope**
(`ARCHITECTURE_AND_CODE_QUALITY.md` §2).

Requested clarification while this ADR is Proposed/Accepted: in the work-order
domain, the interim server-derived scope key is the organization boundary
enforced by `ApplyBaseScope` plus claims-derived role/assignee — not a
`TenantId`/`CustomerId` column. Absence of a multi-tenant key is a temporary
product/architecture gap until superseded by the path above.

## Review / expiry

Re-review by **2027-02-04**, or earlier if product introduces
`TenantId`/`CustomerId`/`AccountId` on work orders or JWT claims, or when the
linked multi-tenant ticket closes.

## References

- SH-116 — Completion document: fields + media categorization
- SH-221 — Server-derived tenant/customer scope for Work Order domain (deferred enforcement)
- PR that relies on this ADR: Sea-Haven-Industries/shoc-backend#47
- `WorkOrderBoardQueryFilters.ApplyBaseScope`
- `WorkOrderMediaAuthorization`
- `ARCHITECTURE_AND_CODE_QUALITY.md` §2, §10
- `REVIEW_AND_PR_FRAMEWORK.md` §7, §8