fix: update mock config to include scheme for csrf domains

[wgu-taylor-payne]

Related to #33228.

Description

Since the scheme must be included for the CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS setting since Django 4.0, this changes the values in the mock.yml configuration files to use the scheme for the values under CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS. We match the values defined under CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME key.

lms/envs/production.py pulls from CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME in the YAML config to set the CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS setting , but cms/envs/production.py pulls from CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS in the YAML. So, this change fixes the CMS when run with mock.yml.

Testing instructions

Run SERVICE_VARIANT=cms DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE=cms.envs.production CMS_CFG=cms/envs/mock.yml ./manage.py cms dump_settings in a Tutor dev environment on master and you will get this error:

ERRORS:
?: (4_0.E001) As of Django 4.0, the values in the CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS setting must start with a scheme (usually http:// or https://) but found .localhost. See the release notes for details.

Run the command on this branch and it will execute successfully.

[openedx-webhooks]

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

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

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.

---

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.

[wgu-taylor-payne]

@kdmccormick - @wgu-ram-chandra brought to my attention that the command in the "Testing instructions" is working on master. I just looked, and in my recent settings PR I had updated this line to use CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME (like what is done in lms/envs/production.py) rather than CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS. I had put that in first as a temporary solution to solve the issue described in this PR, but failed to remove it.

This could potentially lead to unintended consequences, if operators had valid, up-to-date values in CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS, but not in CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME in a custom YAML file. Do you think it is safe to keep that change, or should we revert back to CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS?

[tonybusa]

Incoming potentially stupid question - do you still need CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME??

If Django>=4.0 must include both scheme and host in CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS, is there any global constraint on allowing a minimum Django version (i.e. <3.x) that would require backwards compatibility to keep the CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME variable?

[wgu-taylor-payne]

@tonybusa That's a good point. CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME was introduced during the transition to Django 4, but now that the transition is over, it probably doesn't make sense to keep around. I think it would be good to have the YAML key match the variable name (i.e. CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS), but we would need to give operators some notice so that they can move from using CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS_WITH_SCHEME to CSRF_TRUSTED_ORIGINS...at least on the LMS side of things.

[edx-pipeline-bot]

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX staging environment in preparation for a release to production.

[edx-pipeline-bot]

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

[edx-pipeline-bot]

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

[edx-pipeline-bot]

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX staging environment in preparation for a release to production.

[edx-pipeline-bot]

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.