fix(security): protect Docling Serve outbound requests

[erichare]

Summary

• validate Docling Serve URLs with the shared SSRF policy before creating an HTTP client
• pin validated public DNS addresses and disable automatic redirects
• preserve API headers and explicitly allowlisted internal Docling deployments

Validation

• Docling Remote component tests: 9 passed
• Ruff formatting and lint checks
• uv build --package lfx-docling --wheel
• pre-commit hooks

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Improved security for remote Docling requests by blocking metadata-service addresses.
  • Added safer handling for public and explicitly allowlisted internal Docling hosts.
  • Preserved required request headers and connection settings during remote processing.

• Tests

  • Added coverage for secure URL validation, host resolution, allowlisting, and request configuration.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto incremental reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: b82dbe3f-5348-4816-b0c9-deb4a765b9d9

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

Walkthrough

Docling remote task polling and concurrent file conversion now create HTTP clients through a shared SSRF-protected helper. Tests cover metadata URL blocking, public host IP pinning, headers, redirects, and explicitly allowlisted internal hosts.

Changes

Docling SSRF protection

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Centralized protected client creation src/bundles/docling/src/lfx_docling/components/docling/docling_remote.py	Task polling and concurrent conversion use _create_http_client, which applies processed headers and SSRF-protected HTTPX client options.
SSRF behavior tests src/bundles/docling/tests/test_docling_remote.py	Tests validate metadata URL rejection, public-host transport pinning, request options, and explicitly allowlisted internal hosts.

Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• langflow-ai/langflow#13353: Overlaps in Docling remote request and header construction, while this change adds SSRF-protected client configuration.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 8 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Test Quality And Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Coverage is strong for SSRF blocking, headers, and retry/error paths, but the test module imports typing.Self in a Python 3.10-supported package, so it can fail to import.	Import Self from typing_extensions (or avoid it) and add one happy-path process_files test to cover the new client creation flow.

✅ Passed checks (8 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately summarizes the main change: adding security protections for Docling Serve outbound requests.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Test Coverage For New Implementations	✅ Passed	Yes: test_docling_remote.py adds three SSRF-focused tests for process_task_id/process_files, and the file follows the backend test_*.py convention.
Test File Naming And Structure	✅ Passed	test_docling_remote.py is a backend pytest module with descriptive test_ functions, logical helpers, and both positive/negative cases.
Excessive Mock Usage Warning	✅ Passed	Tests use a few focused fakes/monkeypatches only for HTTP/SSRF boundaries; core header/config logic is tested with real component behavior, so mocks aren't excessive.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch fix/le-1785-docling-ssrf

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

✅ Test Coverage Advisor

No source changes detected without accompanying tests. Thanks for keeping coverage up! 🎉

Advisory check only — never blocks merge.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

src/bundles/docling/tests/test_docling_remote.py (1)

150-246: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🔵 Trivial | ⚡ Quick win

Consider adding a pinning/headers test for the process_files call site.

The new pinning/headers/redirect assertions only exercise _process_task_id. process_files (docling_remote.py Line 339) uses the same _create_http_client helper but isn't independently asserted for headers/pinning/follow_redirects, only for the blocking case. As per path instructions for **/test_*.py, ensure "the tests actually cover the new or changed behavior rather than acting as placeholders."

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

In `@src/bundles/docling/tests/test_docling_remote.py` around lines 150 - 246, Add
a dedicated process_files test that exercises the successful HTTP-client
creation path, not only blocked URLs. Configure a public API URL and headers,
stub hostname resolution and the relevant file-processing response, then assert
the captured client uses preserved headers, follow_redirects=False, and an
SSRFProtectedSyncTransport with the expected pinned IPs; keep the existing
_process_task_id coverage unchanged.

Source: Path instructions

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@src/bundles/docling/tests/test_docling_remote.py`:
- Line 5: Update the import in the test module to obtain Self from
typing_extensions instead of typing, while leaving Any imported from typing.
This preserves compatibility with the bundle’s Python 3.10 support.

---

Nitpick comments:
In `@src/bundles/docling/tests/test_docling_remote.py`:
- Around line 150-246: Add a dedicated process_files test that exercises the
successful HTTP-client creation path, not only blocked URLs. Configure a public
API URL and headers, stub hostname resolution and the relevant file-processing
response, then assert the captured client uses preserved headers,
follow_redirects=False, and an SSRFProtectedSyncTransport with the expected
pinned IPs; keep the existing _process_task_id coverage unchanged.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 2f8378d6-8441-42aa-a14c-25c71e348999

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 2433e87 and 264040d.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/bundles/docling/src/lfx_docling/components/docling/docling_remote.py
• src/bundles/docling/tests/test_docling_remote.py

[github-actions]

Frontend Unit Test Coverage Report

Coverage Summary

Lines	Statements	Branches	Functions
	43.54% (58072/133362)	69.2% (7884/11392)	41.56% (1298/3123)

Unit Test Results

Tests	Skipped	Failures	Errors	Time
4978	0 💤	0 ❌	0 🔥	15m 15s ⏱️

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (release-1.10.3@61d6490). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                Coverage Diff                @@
##             release-1.10.3   #14033   +/-   ##
=================================================
  Coverage                  ?   49.54%           
=================================================
  Files                     ?     2164           
  Lines                     ?   207753           
  Branches                  ?    15075           
=================================================
  Hits                      ?   102925           
  Misses                    ?   103343           
  Partials                  ?     1485           

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	65.80% <ø> (?)
frontend	43.54% <ø> (?)
lfx	54.65% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[Adam-Aghili]

LGTM but 1 code rabbit issue is legitimate