feat: split read vs write authz checks for library updates

[wgu-taylor-payne]

Description

Updates the downstream sync v2 endpoints to use courses.view_library_updates for read access (list/summary) and courses.manage_library_updates for write access (sync/decline).

Previously, the list endpoint used has_studio_read_access (legacy only, no authz integration), and the sync/decline endpoints used has_studio_write_access. This meant Course Auditors were blocked from even viewing library update status. Per the design in openedx/openedx-authz#283, auditors should see the library updates page in read-only mode.

User roles impacted: Course Auditor — can now view (but not sync/decline) library updates when authz is enabled.

Changes:

• cms/djangoapps/contentstore/rest_api/v2/views/downstreams.py:
  • DownstreamListView.get: Use COURSES_VIEW_LIBRARY_UPDATES for course-filtered requests
  • DownstreamSummaryView.get: Use COURSES_VIEW_LIBRARY_UPDATES instead of COURSES_VIEW_COURSE
  • _load_accessible_block: Use COURSES_MANAGE_LIBRARY_UPDATES for write, COURSES_VIEW_LIBRARY_UPDATES for read
  • Removed unused has_studio_read_access/has_studio_write_access imports
• Tests: 5 new tests verifying editor can list+sync, auditor can list but not sync, unauthorized gets 403

Rollback: Gated behind AUTHZ_COURSE_AUTHORING_FLAG — disabling the flag triggers legacy fallback via user_has_course_permission.

Supporting information

• Closes Add courses.view_library_updates enforcement in openedx-platform openedx-authz#398
• Related: Design: Course Editor & Course Auditor screen restrictions openedx-authz#283

Testing instructions

1. Enable AUTHZ_COURSE_AUTHORING_FLAG for a course with library-linked components
2. Assign a user the course_auditor role
3. GET /api/contentstore/v2/downstreams/?course_id={course_id} → 200
4. GET /api/contentstore/v2/downstreams/{course_id}/summary → 200
5. POST /api/contentstore/v2/downstreams/{usage_key}/sync → 404 (permission denied)
6. Assign course_editor → sync should succeed (200 or 400 depending on upstream state)
7. User with no role → list returns 403

Deadline

None

AI Usage

Kiro was used as a development partner throughout this PR. I directed the implementation approach, defined scope, reviewed generated code, and made design decisions — Kiro researched the codebase, wrote the implementation and tests, ran lint/type checks, and iterated on fixes. I verified the changes manually against a local Tutor dev environment and reviewed the final diffs before submitting.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @wgu-taylor-payne!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-openedx-platform-oncall.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

• If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
  • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
• If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

• Dependencies

  This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

• Blockers

  This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

• Timeline information

  This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

• Partner information

  This is for a course on edx.org.

• Supporting documentation
• Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

Details

---

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

• Overview of Review Process for Community Contributions
• Pull Request Status Guide
• Making changes to your pull request

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

• The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
• The need for product review
• Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

[mariajgrimaldi]

Out of curiosity. Why is this part of the changes?