[full-ci] fix an error when lock/unlock a file

[2403905]

Description:
We fixed a bug when anonymous user with viewer role in public link of a folder can lock/unlock a file inside it

Related issue:
owncloud/ocis#7785
owncloud/ocis#7761

Related PR:
owncloud/ocis#8472

[butonic]

shouldn't this be handled in the internal/grpc/services/storageprovider/storageprovider.go:

// SetLock puts a lock on the given reference
func (s *service) SetLock(ctx context.Context, req *provider.SetLockRequest) (*provider.SetLockResponse, error) {
	err := s.storage.SetLock(ctx, req.Ref, req.Lock)

	return &provider.SetLockResponse{
		Status: status.NewStatusFromErrType(ctx, "set lock", err),
	}, nil
}

// GetLock returns an existing lock on the given reference
func (s *service) GetLock(ctx context.Context, req *provider.GetLockRequest) (*provider.GetLockResponse, error) {
	lock, err := s.storage.GetLock(ctx, req.Ref)

	return &provider.GetLockResponse{
		Status: status.NewStatusFromErrType(ctx, "get lock", err),
		Lock:   lock,
	}, nil
}

// RefreshLock refreshes an existing lock on the given reference
func (s *service) RefreshLock(ctx context.Context, req *provider.RefreshLockRequest) (*provider.RefreshLockResponse, error) {
	err := s.storage.RefreshLock(ctx, req.Ref, req.Lock, req.ExistingLockId)

	return &provider.RefreshLockResponse{
		Status: status.NewStatusFromErrType(ctx, "refresh lock", err),
	}, nil
}

// Unlock removes an existing lock from the given reference
func (s *service) Unlock(ctx context.Context, req *provider.UnlockRequest) (*provider.UnlockResponse, error) {
	err := s.storage.Unlock(ctx, req.Ref, req.Lock)

	return &provider.UnlockResponse{
		Status: status.NewStatusFromErrType(ctx, "unlock", err),
	}, nil
}

If we only check the current users public share role on the HTTP API this will still be possible on the CS3 API.

[2403905]

It's a fair point

[butonic]

The switch should be extended and the errors should all be from the errors package.

[butonic]

no failing tests? wow! but we should do an ocis bump full test run to verify ;-)