/** * The account-grant state machine: the transitions here, the predicates they * decide by (state, level, scope, the live grant for a pair) in * `./grant-access.ts`. Two modules, one set of rules. * * A grant is one account's standing permission to open another account's * record — to read it, and where the grant says so to add to it. The row is * also the durable record of the consent that created it (there is no second * receipt table — see the model docblock in `prisma/schema.prisma`). * Everything that decides what a grant currently MEANS lives in these two * modules, and nothing else in the tree is allowed to decide it. * * Why one place rather than the rules at the call sites: two consumers read * these rows for different reasons — the acting-account resolver on every * request, and the grant CRUD surface when a person invites, accepts, revokes * or renounces. If each carried its own idea of "active", the two would drift, * and the drift would be silent in exactly one direction: the resolver * admitting a grant the panel shows as ended. The Bearer-token resolver lives * in one file for the same reason, and this module is shaped like it. * (Naming that function here in prose is what trips the frozen-resolver guard * in `src/__tests__/bearer-scope-enforcement-guard.test.ts`, which matches * source text and does not exempt comments. Left as it is: a guard over the * Bearer perimeter that shouts at a mention is the right direction to be * wrong in.) * * Four properties are the whole point, and each is a decision made HERE and * nowhere else: * * * **Pending confers nothing.** An invitation is not access. A row with * `acceptedAt IS NULL` fails {@link isGrantActive} — being handed read * access to someone's health record is not something to impose silently. * * **Expiry is live.** The check runs against the clock on the request that * reads the row, not against a sweep that may not have run. A grant a * second past `expiresAt` is already inert. * * **Revocation never deletes.** {@link revokeGrant} and * {@link renounceGrant} stamp `revokedAt` + `revokedBy` on a row that * stays. A deleted row cannot answer "who had access, from when to when, * and who ended it", and that question is the reason the table exists in * the shape it does. Re-inviting the same person mints a NEW row; the * partial unique index in migration 0292 keeps at most one LIVE row per * pair while the history piles up underneath. * * **The level never widens, and neither does the scope.** A row is READ, * WRITE or MANAGE from the moment it is offered, over the sections it * named at that moment, and no transition here raises either. Widening a * grant somebody has already accepted would change what they agreed to * without asking them again, and the delegate's consent is half of what * makes a write grant legitimate. {@link inviteGrant} carries the * reasoning. * * Every write below is a CONDITIONAL update — the state the transition * requires is in the `where`, not in a read the caller performed a moment * earlier. Two concurrent accepts therefore cannot both win, and a revoke that * lands between a caller's read and its write cannot be overwritten by a * transition computed against the stale row. */ import { prisma } from "@/lib/db"; import { auditLog } from "@/lib/auth/audit"; import { isP2002 } from "@/lib/prisma-errors"; import { clearActingSessions } from "@/lib/sharing/acting-session"; import { releaseUnbackedClientApps } from "@/lib/integrations/oauth-kit/connect-target"; import { activeGuardianWhere, LastManagedGuardianError, ManagedProfileLifecycleError, reduceManagedProfileGuardian, withManagedProfileLock, } from "@/lib/managed-profiles/lifecycle"; import { grantAccessFor, type HandoverAccess, } from "@/lib/managed-profiles/handover-access"; import { isShareDomain } from "@/lib/sharing/scope"; import type { ShareDomain } from "@/lib/sharing/scope"; import { grantState, type GrantDb } from "@/lib/sharing/grant-access"; import { Prisma } from "@/generated/prisma/client"; import type { AccountGrant, AccountGrantAccess, } from "@/generated/prisma/client"; export type GrantErrorCode = /** An account cannot share its record with itself. */ | "self_grant" /** A live grant for this (owner, delegate) pair already exists. */ | "duplicate_live_grant" /** No grant with that id. */ | "not_found" /** The caller is not the delegate this grant names. */ | "not_grantee" /** The caller is not the owner this grant names. */ | "not_grantor" /** Accept ran against a grant that is not pending (already accepted). */ | "not_pending" /** Accept ran against an invitation that had already lapsed. */ | "expired" /** Revoke or renounce ran against a grant that was already ended. */ | "already_revoked" /** * v1.37.0 — the invitation named a scope that cannot mean anything: an * empty array, a key outside the vocabulary, or any scope at all on a * MANAGE invitation, which is whole-record by construction. */ | "invalid_scope"; /** * A refused transition, with a stable code. * * Codes rather than prose because the two consumers map them to different * things — an HTTP status on the CRUD surface, an audit reason in the * resolver — and neither should be parsing a sentence. */ export class GrantError extends Error { constructor(readonly code: GrantErrorCode) { super(`account grant refused: ${code}`); this.name = "GrantError"; } } // ── Lifecycle transitions ─────────────────────────────────────────────────── export interface InviteGrantInput { /** The account whose record is being shared. */ grantorId: string; /** The account being invited to it. */ granteeId: string; /** * What the invitation offers. Required, with no default in this module: a * level nobody named is a level nobody chose, and the one place an omitted * request field becomes READ is the invite schema * (`src/lib/validations/account-sharing.ts`). Two defaults agreeing today is * how they disagree later. */ access: AccountGrantAccess; /** * v1.37.0 — which sections the invitation opens. `null` is the entire * record, and it is a choice rather than an omission: same no-default * posture as `access` above, for the same reason. A scope nobody named is a * scope nobody chose, and two modules that both default it are two modules * that will disagree about it later. * * Refused here, as `invalid_scope`: an empty array (a grant that opens * nothing is not a grant, it is a mistake wearing one), a key outside the * vocabulary, and any scope at all beside MANAGE. The request-shape * validator refuses the same three earlier and more legibly; this is the * floor under it, because the column's meaning is decided in this file and * a caller that never went through a Zod schema must not be able to write a * row the resolver would have to interpret. */ scope: ShareDomain[] | null; /** Optional lapse date. Null = the grant runs until somebody ends it. */ expiresAt?: Date | null; } /** * Offer a grant. The delegate has access only once they accept it. * * The level is fixed here and never moves. There is no widen, no PATCH, no * upgrade endpoint, and the absence is the design rather than a gap: write * access needs two consents, the owner's because it is their record and the * delegate's because they are being asked to put something into somebody's * health record under their own name. Acceptance is the single moment those * two meet, and it happens once. Raising a live grant afterwards would carry * one consent, and it would not be the delegate's. The way up is a new * invitation at the level meant, accepted again — the partial unique index * permits it as soon as the old row is ended, and the cost is one revoke and * one accept. * * Self-grants are refused here rather than by a database CHECK — migration * 0292 carries the reason (the schema-driven wipe seeder plants a row with * grantor = grantee by construction). The refusal is therefore load-bearing: * it is the only thing standing between the app and a nonsense row. */ export async function inviteGrant( input: InviteGrantInput, db: GrantDb = prisma, ): Promise { if (input.grantorId === input.granteeId) { throw new GrantError("self_grant"); } const scope = input.scope; if (scope !== null) { // Whole-record by construction, and the refusal is here rather than in a // comment: "they can do anything, but only to part of you" promises a // boundary that cannot survive an edit, so the product does not offer it // and this file does not store it. if (input.access === "MANAGE") throw new GrantError("invalid_scope"); if (scope.length === 0) throw new GrantError("invalid_scope"); if (!scope.every(isShareDomain)) throw new GrantError("invalid_scope"); if (new Set(scope).size !== scope.length) { throw new GrantError("invalid_scope"); } } const now = new Date(); // An expired grant confers nothing (see `grantState`), but its row still // sits in the live-pair slot the partial unique index guards: the index // predicate is `WHERE revoked_at IS NULL` and cannot read the clock. Without // ending the lapsed row here, a re-invitation for the same pair after expiry // always collides on P2002 and 409s, though the person genuinely has no // access anymore. Close it now — conditionally, the expiry state in the // WHERE — so "revocation never deletes" still holds and the fresh invitation // can mint its row. A live (unexpired) row is not matched, so its P2002 stays // correct. `revokedBy` is stamped GRANTOR rather than left null because the // paired CHECK (`account_grants_revoked_by_check`) requires revoked_at and // revoked_by to be both set or both null and the revoker enum has no expiry // member; the owner re-inviting is the actor that ends the lapsed row. const closed = await db.accountGrant.updateMany({ where: { grantorId: input.grantorId, granteeId: input.granteeId, revokedAt: null, expiresAt: { lte: now }, }, data: { revokedAt: now, revokedBy: "GRANTOR" }, }); if (closed.count > 0) { // Keep "who had access, from when to when, and who ended it" answering // truthfully: the lapsed row ended by its own expiry, closed on re-invite. await auditLog("sharing.grant.expired_closed", { userId: input.grantorId, details: { granteeId: input.granteeId, closedCount: closed.count, reason: "expired", }, client: db, }).catch(() => {}); } try { return await db.accountGrant.create({ data: { grantorId: input.grantorId, granteeId: input.granteeId, access: input.access, // `DbNull` and not `null`: on a nullable Json column Prisma reads a // bare `null` as the JSON value `null`, which is a stored blob that // is not an array and would resolve through `normaliseScope` to the // empty set — a grant that opens nothing, written by the path meant // to open everything. The two nulls are one keystroke apart and mean // opposite things here. // scopeJson: scope === null ? Prisma.DbNull : scope, invitedAt: now, expiresAt: input.expiresAt ?? null, }, }); } catch (err) { // The partial unique index is what refuses a second live grant for the // pair; a revoked row never collides, so a re-invitation after revocation // lands as a new row and the old one keeps its history. if (isP2002(err)) throw new GrantError("duplicate_live_grant"); throw err; } } export interface AcceptGrantInput { grantId: string; /** Taken from the authenticated session — never from a request body. */ granteeId: string; } /** * Accept an invitation. Delegate-only, one-shot. * * The claim is the `where` clause: `acceptedAt: null` means two concurrent * accepts cannot both update a row, and a grant the owner revoked in the * meantime cannot be accepted at all. On a miss the row is read back once to * say WHY, which is a diagnosis and never a second chance. */ export async function acceptGrant( input: AcceptGrantInput, ): Promise { return prisma.$transaction((tx) => acceptGrantInTransaction(input, tx)); } async function acceptGrantInTransaction( input: AcceptGrantInput, tx: Prisma.TransactionClient, ): Promise { const candidate = await tx.accountGrant.findUnique({ where: { id: input.grantId }, select: { grantorId: true, access: true }, }); if (!candidate) { throw await refusalFor(input.grantId, { granteeId: input.granteeId }, tx); } const accept = async (managedProfile: boolean) => { const now = new Date(); const { count } = await tx.accountGrant.updateMany({ where: { id: input.grantId, granteeId: input.granteeId, acceptedAt: null, revokedAt: null, OR: [{ expiresAt: null }, { expiresAt: { gt: now } }], }, data: { acceptedAt: now, ...(managedProfile ? { expiresAt: null } : {}), }, }); if (count === 0) { throw await refusalFor(input.grantId, { granteeId: input.granteeId }, tx); } return tx.accountGrant.findUniqueOrThrow({ where: { id: input.grantId } }); }; if (candidate.access !== "MANAGE") return accept(false); return withManagedProfileLock(tx, candidate.grantorId, async (profile) => accept(Boolean(profile?.managedProfileAt)), ); } export async function inviteManagedProfileGuardian(input: { profileId: string; guardianId: string; granteeId: string; expiresAt?: Date | null; }): Promise { return prisma.$transaction(async (tx) => { return withManagedProfileLock(tx, input.profileId, async (profile) => { if (!profile) throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_found"); if (!profile.managedProfileAt) { throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_managed"); } const guardian = await tx.accountGrant.findFirst({ where: { grantorId: profile.id, granteeId: input.guardianId, ...activeGuardianWhere(new Date()), }, select: { id: true }, }); if (!guardian) throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_guardian"); const grantee = await tx.user.findUnique({ where: { id: input.granteeId }, select: { managedProfileAt: true }, }); if (grantee?.managedProfileAt) { throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("managed_grantee"); } const grant = await inviteGrant( { grantorId: profile.id, granteeId: input.granteeId, access: "MANAGE", scope: null, expiresAt: input.expiresAt ?? null, }, tx, ); await auditLog("managed_profile.guardian.invited", { userId: profile.id, actorUserId: input.guardianId, details: { grantId: grant.id }, client: tx, }); return grant; }); }); } export async function revokeManagedProfileGuardian(input: { profileId: string; guardianId: string; grantId: string; }): Promise { return prisma.$transaction(async (tx) => { return withManagedProfileLock(tx, input.profileId, async (profile) => { if (!profile) throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_found"); if (!profile.managedProfileAt) { throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_managed"); } const requester = await tx.accountGrant.findFirst({ where: { grantorId: profile.id, granteeId: input.guardianId, ...activeGuardianWhere(new Date()), }, select: { id: true }, }); if (!requester) throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_guardian"); const target = await tx.accountGrant.findFirst({ where: { id: input.grantId, grantorId: profile.id, access: "MANAGE", revokedAt: null, }, select: { id: true, granteeId: true, acceptedAt: true, expiresAt: true, }, }); if (!target) throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_guardian"); if (target.granteeId === input.guardianId) { throw new ManagedProfileLifecycleError("not_guardian"); } const now = new Date(); const targetIsActive = target.acceptedAt !== null && (target.expiresAt === null || target.expiresAt > now); if (targetIsActive) { const activeGuardians = await tx.accountGrant.count({ where: { grantorId: profile.id, ...activeGuardianWhere(now) }, }); if (activeGuardians <= 1) throw new LastManagedGuardianError(); } await tx.accountGrant.update({ where: { id: target.id }, // `revokedBy` records which grant party withdrew access. The managed // profile is the grantor; the individual Guardian is durable audit // attribution below rather than an overloaded enum value. data: { revokedAt: now, revokedBy: "GRANTOR" }, }); await clearActingSessions( { grantorId: profile.id, granteeId: target.granteeId }, tx, ); // A provider app the profile borrowed from this guardian goes with them. await releaseUnbackedClientApps(profile.id, tx); // v1.42 (#959) — a handover link the removed Guardian minted dies with // their access. The claim refuses it anyway (its creator must still be // an active Guardian); withdrawing it here keeps the other Guardians' // panel from showing a link that can no longer be used. await tx.managedProfileHandover.updateMany({ where: { profileId: profile.id, createdById: target.granteeId, usedAt: null, revokedAt: null, }, data: { revokedAt: now }, }); await auditLog("managed_profile.guardian.revoked", { userId: profile.id, actorUserId: input.guardianId, details: { grantId: target.id }, client: tx, }); return tx.accountGrant.findUniqueOrThrow({ where: { id: target.id } }); }); }); } // ── Handover (v1.42, #959) ────────────────────────────────────────────────── /** * Withdraw every invitation the record has offered and nobody has accepted. * * Called when a managed profile is claimed. A pending MANAGE invitation on a * managed profile is a Guardian invitation; once the record belongs to an * adult, `acceptGrant` would still accept it, and the invitee would become a * MANAGE delegate of a person who never agreed to them. Withdrawing every * pending row the record has offered closes that, and nothing else is lost: * the new owner invites whoever they want themselves. * * `revokedBy = GRANTOR` because the record's owner is the party ending them. * Must run inside the caller's transaction and under the managed-profile lock, * which is what orders it against a concurrent acceptance. */ export async function withdrawPendingGrantsOfRecord( tx: Prisma.TransactionClient, recordId: string, now: Date, ): Promise { const { count } = await tx.accountGrant.updateMany({ where: { grantorId: recordId, acceptedAt: null, revokedAt: null }, data: { revokedAt: now, revokedBy: "GRANTOR" }, }); return count; } /** What settling one Guardian's access did. */ export interface HandoverGrantSettlement { /** The level the Guardian now holds. */ access: HandoverAccess; /** The live grant afterwards, or null when access ended. */ grantId: string | null; /** Whether a row was ended or written. */ changed: boolean; /** How many of the Guardian's browser sessions were inside the record. */ sessionsCleared: number; } /** * Set one former Guardian's access to a managed profile that is being, or has * just been, handed over. The one place a handover moves a grant. * * The rules of WHICH level to set live in `handover-access.ts`; this is the * mechanics, and it follows the state machine above: * * - the level a row carries never moves. Changing it ends the row * (`revokedBy = GRANTOR`, the record's owner deciding) and writes a new * one, so the history keeps "who had what, from when to when"; * - ending a row and clearing the sessions inside it are one act, in the * caller's transaction, as {@link endAndClear} has it for the panel; * - a row that already says what the target says is left alone. * * The new row is written ACCEPTED, which is the one place this file creates a * grant without an acceptance, and it is argued rather than assumed. The * Guardian accepted MANAGE over this whole record when they became a Guardian; * a handover only ever sets a level at or below that, and only for somebody * who held it a moment earlier. A READ row cut from their MANAGE is a * narrowing they need no new consent for, and a MANAGE row the new owner * restores is the consent they already gave. What it cannot do is reach * anybody who was not a Guardian of this record, or reach above MANAGE. * * Callers hold the managed-profile lock (`withManagedProfileLock`) for the * transaction, so the live row read beside this call is the row it settles. */ export async function settleHandoverGuardianGrant( tx: Prisma.TransactionClient, input: { recordId: string; guardianId: string; /** The pair's live row (`revokedAt IS NULL`), or null. */ liveGrant: Pick | null; target: HandoverAccess; now: Date; }, ): Promise { const pair = { grantorId: input.recordId, granteeId: input.guardianId }; const targetAccess = grantAccessFor(input.target); const live = input.liveGrant; const alreadyThere = live !== null && targetAccess !== null && live.access === targetAccess && (live.access === "MANAGE" || live.scopeJson === null); if (alreadyThere) { return { access: input.target, grantId: live.id, changed: false, sessionsCleared: 0, }; } if (live === null && targetAccess === null) { return { access: "end", grantId: null, changed: false, sessionsCleared: 0, }; } if (live !== null) { await tx.accountGrant.updateMany({ where: { id: live.id, revokedAt: null }, data: { revokedAt: input.now, revokedBy: "GRANTOR" }, }); } let grantId: string | null = null; if (targetAccess !== null) { const created = await tx.accountGrant.create({ data: { grantorId: input.recordId, granteeId: input.guardianId, access: targetAccess, // `DbNull`, never `null`: see `inviteGrant` for why the two nulls // mean opposite things on this column. scopeJson: Prisma.DbNull, invitedAt: input.now, acceptedAt: input.now, expiresAt: null, }, select: { id: true }, }); grantId = created.id; } const sessionsCleared = await clearActingSessions(pair, tx); // A Guardian who keeps no MANAGE takes back the provider app they lent. await releaseUnbackedClientApps(input.recordId, tx); return { access: input.target, grantId, changed: true, sessionsCleared }; } export interface RevokeGrantInput { grantId: string; /** The owner ending their own grant. Taken from the session. */ grantorId: string; } /** * The owner withdraws access. * * No step-up, no friction: reducing access must never be harder than granting * it. The row survives with `revokedBy = GRANTOR`, and because the resolver * re-reads the grant on every request, enforcement is the delegate's next * request rather than their next login. */ export async function revokeGrant( input: RevokeGrantInput, ): Promise { return prisma.$transaction((tx) => endGrant(input.grantId, { grantorId: input.grantorId }, "GRANTOR", tx), ); } export interface RenounceGrantInput { grantId: string; /** The delegate handing the access back. Taken from the session. */ granteeId: string; } /** * The delegate hands the access back. * * Same transition, different attribution: `revokedBy = GRANTEE` so the record * can tell "the owner withdrew it" from "the person given access no longer * wanted it". Two facts, one column, because they are answers to the same * question. */ export async function renounceGrant( input: RenounceGrantInput, ): Promise { return prisma.$transaction((tx) => endGrant(input.grantId, { granteeId: input.granteeId }, "GRANTEE", tx), ); } /** * What ending a grant did: the row as it now stands, and how many of the * delegate's browser sessions were sitting inside the record when it happened. */ export interface EndedGrant { grant: AccountGrant; sessionsCleared: number; } /** * The owner withdraws access, and any browser already inside the record leaves * with it. * * This is the verb the sharing panel calls; {@link revokeGrant} is the state * transition underneath it. They are separate because the transition has to be * usable inside somebody else's transaction, and because a caller who takes the * transition alone should have to notice they are leaving sessions behind. * * One transaction, and the reason is a specific failure: the grant row and the * sessions pointing at it are two statements of the same fact, and a revocation * that stamped the row but not the sessions would leave the delegate's browser * inside a record it can no longer read — every request 403, the banner still * saying "viewing her record", nothing on screen able to account for it. The * resolver would refuse correctly and the person would still be looking at a * lie. * * Still no step-up, no confirmation ceremony, nothing that makes this slower * than granting was. Reducing access must never be harder than giving it: the * person ending access to their own health record is the one party here whose * intent needs no verification. */ export async function revokeGrantAndClearSwitch( input: RevokeGrantInput, ): Promise { return endAndClear((tx) => endGrant(input.grantId, { grantorId: input.grantorId }, "GRANTOR", tx), ); } /** * The delegate hands the access back, and their own browser leaves the record. * * Same cleanup, and for a sharper reason than on the revoke side: the session * being cleared is almost certainly the one making this very request, because * renouncing is a thing people do while looking at the record they are * renouncing. */ export async function renounceGrantAndClearSwitch( input: RenounceGrantInput, ): Promise { return endAndClear((tx) => endGrant(input.grantId, { granteeId: input.granteeId }, "GRANTEE", tx), ); } // ── Internals ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── /** * Run an ending transition and its session cleanup as one unit. * * The transition runs first and throws on a refusal, which rolls the whole * thing back — so a revoke somebody was not entitled to make cannot clear a * session as a side effect of being refused. */ async function endAndClear( transition: (tx: Prisma.TransactionClient) => Promise, ): Promise { return prisma.$transaction(async (tx) => { const grant = await transition(tx); const sessionsCleared = await clearActingSessions( { grantorId: grant.grantorId, granteeId: grant.granteeId }, tx, ); // An ended MANAGE grant takes back the provider app it lent the record. await releaseUnbackedClientApps(grant.grantorId, tx); return { grant, sessionsCleared }; }); } /** The shared body of revoke and renounce. */ async function endGrant( grantId: string, actor: { grantorId: string } | { granteeId: string }, revokedBy: "GRANTOR" | "GRANTEE", db: Prisma.TransactionClient, ): Promise { const current = await db.accountGrant.findUnique({ where: { id: grantId }, select: { grantorId: true, granteeId: true, access: true, acceptedAt: true, revokedAt: true, expiresAt: true, }, }); const end = async () => { const { count } = await db.accountGrant.updateMany({ where: { id: grantId, ...actor, revokedAt: null }, data: { revokedAt: new Date(), revokedBy }, }); if (count === 0) throw await refusalFor(grantId, actor, db); return db.accountGrant.findUniqueOrThrow({ where: { id: grantId } }); }; const actorOwnsGrant = current && ("grantorId" in actor ? current.grantorId === actor.grantorId : current.granteeId === actor.granteeId); const isActiveManagedGuardian = current?.access === "MANAGE" && current.acceptedAt !== null && current.revokedAt === null && (current.expiresAt === null || current.expiresAt > new Date()); if (!actorOwnsGrant || !isActiveManagedGuardian) return end(); // `current` was read before the record lock. A concurrent change that holds // the lock first (the Guardian's account deletion ends this grant) commits // in between, and counting under the lock would then refuse with "add // another Guardian" for a grant that is no longer active, instead of saying // it has already ended. So the grant is re-read under the lock; only a grant // still live there is a Guardian whose removal the count has to allow. return withManagedProfileLock(db, current.grantorId, async () => { const live = await db.accountGrant.findFirst({ where: { id: grantId, revokedAt: null }, select: { id: true }, }); if (!live) return end(); return reduceManagedProfileGuardian(db, current.grantorId, end); }); } /** * Why did a conditional update match nothing? * * Read once, after the fact, purely to name the refusal. The ordering is * ownership first: telling a stranger "that grant is already revoked" would * confirm the grant exists, so a caller who is not a party to the row learns * only that it is not theirs. */ async function refusalFor( grantId: string, actor: { grantorId: string } | { granteeId: string }, db: GrantDb, ): Promise { const grant = await db.accountGrant.findUnique({ where: { id: grantId } }); if (!grant) return new GrantError("not_found"); if ("granteeId" in actor) { if (grant.granteeId !== actor.granteeId) { return new GrantError("not_grantee"); } } else if (grant.grantorId !== actor.grantorId) { return new GrantError("not_grantor"); } // The state machine names the refusal, so "why did this fail" and "what is // this row" can never give different answers. switch (grantState(grant)) { case "REVOKED": return new GrantError("already_revoked"); case "EXPIRED": return new GrantError("expired"); // Reached only from the accept path — revoke and renounce match any live // row, lapsed or not, because ending a grant explicitly is always the // owner's or the delegate's to do. default: return new GrantError("not_pending"); } }