README: say WHY redaction is TS+Rust, so it stops reading as a parity gap - #116
Merged
Conversation
… gap "redaction: TypeScript and Rust" with no explanation looks like the security fix reached 2 of 5 ports. It didn't: it reached 2 of the 2 ports that log anything about a request. Python and Go have no logging call at all, and .NET holds an ILogger<SmooFetch> for DI and never calls it. A reviewer already came within a step of filing that bug against the matrix, so the reasoning belongs next to the claim rather than in a PR description nobody reads twice. The corpus itself already carries the forward-looking half of the rule -- add a sink, wire it to the corpus in the same PR -- and the README now points at it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0152bbE1veqfG1SVJdyLCBxC
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A reviewer came within a step of filing a parity bug against the redaction work, because the evidence on
mainreads as "the security fix reached 2 of 5 ports":spec/redaction-corpus.jsonis loaded bysrc/redact.spec.tsandrust/fetch/src/redact.rsonlyIt reached 2 of the 2 ports that log anything about a request. The README now says so, right next to the language matrix, with the per-port evidence:
tracing::debug!eventILogger<SmooFetch>held for DI, never called)Plus the reason a scrubber was not added to the other three: it would be code no call site reaches, which reads as a guarantee while guaranteeing nothing.
No test added for the "never logs a body" property in Python/Go/.NET. Asserting the absence of code that doesn't exist is brittle, and the forward-looking half of the rule already ships in the corpus itself: "Python, Go and .NET have no logging sink at all, so they implement nothing and load nothing; if a sink is ever added there, wire it to this corpus in the same PR." The README now points at that file, so the next person to add a logging call reads the rule before writing the leak.
Docs only.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_0152bbE1veqfG1SVJdyLCBxC