[PM-24788] Remove Org-Based Policy Requirements Queries

[sven-bitwarden]

🎟️ Tracking

PM-24788

📔 Objective

Previously within the policy requirements feature, we could only gather enforcement data for individual users, or for organizations. #6876 enabled retrieving policy requirements for multiple users, which is much more efficient in scenarios where out of an entire organization, we need policy requirements for a handful of users.

This PR adjusts the areas that had previously used the by-org query to load by the user IDs on hand. It also changes the OrgDataOwnershipPolicyRequirement to return a helpful (pre-existing) model that gives back the org user ID it's applicable to.

[claude]

Claude finished @bnagawiecki's task in 3m 58s —— View job

---

Re-Review: PM-24788 Remove Org-Based Policy Requirements Queries

Previous Finding Status

Previous Severity	Finding	Status
⛔ CRITICAL	4 test methods referencing removed GetManyByOrganizationIdAsync method	RESOLVED in 333a06ec9

Incremental Changes Reviewed (since last review at 333a06ec9)

Commit	Description	Assessment
14270061d	Merge from main	Clean merge; brought formatting fix in constructor and DefaultUserCollectionRestore FF removal (from PR #7071)

Verification

• No remaining references to GetManyByOrganizationIdAsync<T>() or RequiresDefaultCollectionOnConfirm anywhere in the codebase
• Merge from main cleanly applied: DefaultUserCollectionRestore feature flag removal in RestoreOrganizationUserCommand now runs default collection logic unconditionally, consistent with the rest of this PR's approach
• Minor constructor formatting fix in ConfirmOrganizationUserCommand is cosmetic only
• All test mocks correctly use GetAsync<T>(IEnumerable<Guid>) with appropriate Arg.Is matchers
• UseMyItemsDisabled tests correctly omit stale mock setups (code returns early before policy query)

Result

Approved -- All previous findings resolved. Merge from main introduces no new issues.

[sven-bitwarden]

The difference between these two methods (== 1 vs > 1) was whether or not it used the by-org or by-user policy requirements query.

Since we removed the by-org query, and the by-user query delegates to the by-multiple-users query, these methods don't need to be separate anymore.

[github-actions]

Checkmarx One – Scan Summary & Details – 08b0db9d-dd3e-4153-b645-ca2afc8a178f

Great job! No new security vulnerabilities introduced in this pull request

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 94.87179% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 56.44%. Comparing base (07ead26) to head (1427006).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...s/RestoreUser/v1/RestoreOrganizationUserCommand.cs	90.90%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7038      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.45%   56.44%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        2013     2013              
  Lines       88109    88089      -20     
  Branches     7862     7855       -7     
==========================================
- Hits        49739    49719      -20     
- Misses      36554    36555       +1     
+ Partials     1816     1815       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 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.

[r-tome]

Looks great!

[sven-bitwarden]

@r-tome fixed some merge conflicts and got the tests restored

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud