fix: TA tokenless uploads

[joseph-sentry]

previously it was broken because it was trying to get the repository and commit information from the request path, when TA requests store that information in the body. So we take the same modifications that the BA tokenless authentication made but change the service to be fetched from the "service" key instead of the "git_service" key

Fixes: codecov/codecov-action#1762

[codecov-notifications]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.21053% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
codecov_auth/authentication/repo_auth.py	84.21%	3 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 84.21053% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 95.86%. Comparing base (5df99ba) to head (2d4a7f5).
Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
codecov_auth/authentication/repo_auth.py	84.21%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1187      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.88%   95.86%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         493      493              
  Lines       16851    16870      +19     
==========================================
+ Hits        16157    16173      +16     
- Misses        694      697       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unit	95.86% <84.21%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

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

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

[adrian-codecov]

I checked w/ Shelter's logic and it seems to be aligned. Could you double check thought? Should start at get_token, then should go to tokenless_allowed, and then should go to _tokenless_v2_allowed (and that's the logic that should be on par). This assumes you also accept the newest "true tokenless" method as well btw, so just confirming that's fine too

[joseph-sentry]

This assumes you also accept the newest "true tokenless" method as well btw, so just confirming that's fine too
@adrian-codecov yeah i think that's covered

actually looking at _tokenless_v2_allowed i think this line might also apply to TA, so that's a change we should make alongside this one, to keep things secure