Add support for kiosk mode on the client. Make sure the settings are written in the lockbox.

chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher_unittest.cc

 // Copyright (c) 2012 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
 // found in the LICENSE file.
 
 #include "chrome/browser/policy/device_token_fetcher.h"
 
 #include "base/message_loop.h"
 #include "base/scoped_temp_dir.h"
 #include "chrome/browser/policy/cloud_policy_data_store.h"
 #include "chrome/browser/policy/logging_work_scheduler.h"
@@ skipping 17 matching lines @@
 using testing::_;
 
 class DeviceTokenFetcherTest : public testing::Test {
  protected:
   DeviceTokenFetcherTest()
       : ui_thread_(BrowserThread::UI, &loop_),
         file_thread_(BrowserThread::FILE, &loop_) {
     EXPECT_TRUE(temp_user_data_dir_.CreateUniqueTempDir());
     successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
         set_device_management_token("fake_token");
+    successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
+        set_enrollment_type(em::DeviceRegisterResponse::ENTERPRISE);
   }
 
   virtual void SetUp() {
     cache_.reset(new UserPolicyCache(
         temp_user_data_dir_.path().AppendASCII("DeviceTokenFetcherTest"),
         false  /* wait_for_policy_fetch */));
     EXPECT_CALL(service_, StartJob(_)).Times(AnyNumber());
     data_store_.reset(CloudPolicyDataStore::CreateForUserPolicies());
     data_store_->AddObserver(&observer_);
   }
@@ skipping 52 matching lines @@
 TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchToken) {
   testing::InSequence s;
   EXPECT_CALL(service_,
               CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
       .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
   EXPECT_CALL(service_, StartJob(_)).WillOnce(VerifyRegisterRequest(false));
   DeviceTokenFetcher fetcher(&service_, cache_.get(), data_store_.get(),
                              &notifier_);
   EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
   EXPECT_EQ("", data_store_->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store_->device_mode());
   FetchToken(&fetcher);
   loop_.RunAllPending();
   Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
   std::string token = data_store_->device_token();
   EXPECT_NE("", token);
+  // User policy registration should not set enrollment mode.
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store_->device_mode());
 
   // Calling FetchToken() again should result in a new token being fetched.
   successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
       set_device_management_token("new_fake_token");
   EXPECT_CALL(service_,
               CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
       .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
   EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
   FetchToken(&fetcher);
   loop_.RunAllPending();
   Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
   std::string token2 = data_store_->device_token();
   EXPECT_NE("", token2);
   EXPECT_NE(token, token2);
 }
 
+// User token fetches does not have to carry enrollment type.

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

That comment is misleading, since the test is really about device registrations.
Say something like "For device registrations, the fetcher needs to determine
device mode."

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Yep. I removed the comment here and put it down at the point I EXPECT that the
mode has been set.

+TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchDeviceToken) {
+  testing::InSequence s;
+  scoped_ptr<CloudPolicyDataStore> data_store(
+      CloudPolicyDataStore::CreateForDevicePolicies());
+  data_store->AddObserver(&observer_);

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

do you actually need the observer for this test? I guess not.

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Done.

+  EXPECT_CALL(service_,
+              CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
+      .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
+  EXPECT_CALL(service_, StartJob(_)).WillOnce(VerifyRegisterRequest(false));
+  DeviceTokenFetcher fetcher(&service_, cache_.get(), data_store.get(),
+                             &notifier_);
+  EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
+  EXPECT_EQ("", data_store->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store->device_mode());
+  data_store->SetupForTesting("", "fake_device_id", "fake_user_name",
+                              "fake_auth_token", true);
+  fetcher.FetchToken();
+  loop_.RunAllPending();
+  Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
+  EXPECT_NE("", data_store->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_ENTERPRISE, data_store->device_mode());
+
+  data_store->RemoveObserver(&observer_);
+}
+
+// TODO(pastarmovj): This test must be changed in accordance with
+// http://crosbug.com/26624.
+TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, FetchDeviceTokenMissingMode) {
+  testing::InSequence s;
+  scoped_ptr<CloudPolicyDataStore> data_store(
+      CloudPolicyDataStore::CreateForDevicePolicies());
+  data_store->AddObserver(&observer_);

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

ditto

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Done.

+  EXPECT_CALL(service_,
+              CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
+      .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
+  EXPECT_CALL(service_, StartJob(_)).WillOnce(VerifyRegisterRequest(false));
+  DeviceTokenFetcher fetcher(&service_, cache_.get(), data_store.get(),
+                             &notifier_);
+  EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
+  EXPECT_EQ("", data_store->device_token());
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_UNKNOWN, data_store->device_mode());
+  data_store->SetupForTesting("", "fake_device_id", "fake_user_name",
+                              "fake_auth_token", true);

[Mattias Nissler (ping if slow), 2012/02/21 10:37:46]

It looks like this setup code is now duplicated 3 times for the most part. Any
chance to consolidate?

[pastarmovj, 2012/02/21 14:57:08]

Did some consolidation. Could push it further but I think this will make future
changes in single tests rather harder.

+  successful_registration_response_.mutable_register_response()->
+      clear_enrollment_type();
+  fetcher.FetchToken();
+  loop_.RunAllPending();
+  Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
+  EXPECT_NE("", data_store->device_token());
+  // TODO(pastarmovj): Modify when http://crosbug.com/26624 is resolved.
+  EXPECT_EQ(DEVICE_MODE_ENTERPRISE, data_store->device_mode());
+
+  data_store->RemoveObserver(&observer_);
+}
+
 TEST_F(DeviceTokenFetcherTest, RetryOnError) {
   testing::InSequence s;
   EXPECT_CALL(service_,
               CreateJob(DeviceManagementRequestJob::TYPE_REGISTRATION))
       .WillOnce(service_.FailJob(DM_STATUS_REQUEST_FAILED))
       .WillOnce(service_.SucceedJob(successful_registration_response_));
   DeviceTokenFetcher fetcher(&service_, cache_.get(), data_store_.get(),
                              &notifier_, new DummyWorkScheduler);
   EXPECT_CALL(observer_, OnDeviceTokenChanged());
   FetchToken(&fetcher);
@@ skipping 75 matching lines @@
   data_store_->set_known_machine_id(true);
   FetchToken(&fetcher);
   loop_.RunAllPending();
 
   Mock::VerifyAndClearExpectations(&observer_);
   std::string token = data_store_->device_token();
   EXPECT_NE("", token);
 }
 
 }  // namespace policy