admin
636c51e542
A customer whose machine was rebuilt had everything needed to get their data back and no way to find out: the only route was a command line. This is the screen that closes that. IT UNLOCKS, AND ONLY UNLOCKS (operator ruling). It explains, takes the recovery code, opens the repository and shows what is in there — apps, dates, sizes. It restores nothing: restore is already per-app and lives in the backups area, and a screen that unlocks and then offers to overwrite is two decisions wearing one button. ONE CORE, TWO CALLERS. RecoverInstallCore is split out of RecoverAndInstall; the CLI wrapper keeps its exit codes and printed lines byte-identical, and the handler drives the same function. Two implementations of the one operation that can permanently lose a customer's data would drift, and only one would be tested. Asserted from source on both sides by AST. THREE WAYS OUT, none a dismiss button: recover; 'most nem' (the full page stops interrupting, the backups-area entry point stays PERMANENTLY, bound to the offer and never to the postpone flag); and 'I do not want the old data' — confirmed TWICE and reaching the SHIPPED move-aside, which sets aside and never deletes. THE CODE IS HANDLED NO MORE LOOSELY THAN ON THE COMMAND LINE: POST body only, never logged, never persisted, never echoed, cleared on every path, no-store, autocomplete off. No lockout — the code is a ten-word phrase, and locking a customer out of their own data for a typo is worse than anything it prevents. TWO DEFECTS THE TESTS CAUGHT, both fixed: an UNCLAIMED (legacy-open) box would have been shown the page, because RequireAuth passes such a box through; and the inventory nil-dereferenced when no off-site target was configured, which is exactly the pristine rebuilt shape.