You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When input/result is masked, e.g. mask["/result/something_sensitive"], it should be removed from the decision logs, but not from the /v1/data API response (optionally?). Decision logs tend to be shipped centrally, and sensitive data should be removed from those, but the /v1/data API response should still contain that data so that calling apps can use it as needed.
Actual Behavior
When mask is used, it impacts both the decision logs and the /v1/data API response.
Steps to Reproduce the Problem
OPA version: 0.24.0-dev
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This sounds like a bug. The result sent to the caller should not be mutated by the decision log mask--the decision logger will need to make a deep copy of the result before applying the mask (if the mask doesn't refer to the result, we can avoid the copy for performance.)
When mask rules targeted /result, it was modifying both the result
in the decision logs (intended) and the result in the API
response (unintended). Added a step to deep copy the result only once, if
there is at least one mask rule targeting the result.
Fixes#2752
Signed-off-by: Grant Shively <[email protected]>
Expected Behavior
When input/result is masked, e.g.
mask["/result/something_sensitive"]
, it should be removed from the decision logs, but not from the/v1/data
API response (optionally?). Decision logs tend to be shipped centrally, and sensitive data should be removed from those, but the/v1/data
API response should still contain that data so that calling apps can use it as needed.Actual Behavior
When
mask
is used, it impacts both the decision logs and the/v1/data
API response.Steps to Reproduce the Problem
OPA version: 0.24.0-dev
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: