BE-310: Protect sensitive properties from enumeration attacks #8332

TimDiekmann · 2026-01-28T12:29:18Z

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

This PR adds protection against enumeration attacks by preventing filtering on sensitive properties like email for User entities. It implements a filter transformation system that automatically excludes User entities when filtering by email, while preserving legitimate query paths.

🔍 What does this change?

Adds a FilterProtectionConfig system to specify which properties should be protected for which entity types
Implements a filter transformation algorithm that prevents User enumeration via email filters
Adds a new skip_filter_protection flag to disable protection in development/testing
Updates the AI worker to exclude email from entity embeddings for User entities

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

do not affect the execution graph

🛡 What tests cover this?

Comprehensive integration tests for all filter protection cases
Truth table verification for various filter combinations
Tests for multi-property and multi-type protection scenarios
Tests for actor identity-based exclusions

❓ How to test this?

Checkout the branch
Try filtering entities by email
Confirm that User entities are not returned when filtering by email
Verify that non-User entities (like Invitations) can still be filtered by email
Verify that a User can query their own entity by email, but not other Users

Introduces a filter transformation system that prevents attackers from discovering users by filtering on protected properties like email. Even when the API strips email from responses, returning results reveals user existence. The protection works by transforming filters at query time: - Email conditions get `AND NOT(type=User)` added at leaf level - NOT depth tracking ensures De Morgan-correct transformations - OR branches are preserved (legitimate matches via other conditions) - Machine actors bypass protection for system operations Configurable via FilterProtectionConfig with property→entity type mapping. CLI flag `--skip-filter-protection` available for dev/testing.

Refactors filter protection to correctly handle entities with multiple types. - Introduces FilterExpressionList enum to allow Filter::In to accept either a ParameterList or a Path, enabling IN checks against array columns - Changes type exclusion from Equal(EntityTypeEdge) to In(TypeBaseUrls) which properly checks if a type is present in an entity's type array - Updates all Filter::In usages to wrap ParameterList in FilterExpressionList

- Use let chains to collapse nested if-let statements - Change &Option<T> to Option<&T> for better API ergonomics - Add #[must_use] to transform_filter - Replace wildcard enum match with explicit variants - Use #[expect] instead of #[allow] with reasons - Fix doc comment punctuation - Use is_none_or instead of map_or(true, ...) - Add const to pure functions - Use self instead of &self for Copy types

Prevents email enumeration attacks via CosineDistance queries on embeddings. When generating embeddings for User entities, the email property is now excluded from both individual property embeddings and the combined embedding.

Add early check for empty FilterProtectionConfig to avoid unnecessary filter transformation when no properties are protected.

Extend test coverage for FilterProtectionConfig: Multi-property tests (2 properties / 1 type): - email AND phone both protected for User - Tests: individual filters, AND, OR combinations Multi-type tests (2 types / 1 property each): - email protected for User, secret_code protected for SecretEntity - Tests: verify cross-type protection independence Also adds DatabaseTestWrapper::new_with_settings() to allow custom FilterProtectionConfig in tests.

Document the expected behavior with ASCII truth tables showing: - MP-1 to MP-4: Multi-property cases (email + phone → User) - MT-1 to MT-4: Multi-type cases (email → User, secret → SecretEntity) Tables clarify the cross-protection behavior in OR expressions where each type can still match via the branch that isn't protected for them.

- Remove unused #[expect(clippy::struct_excessive_bools)] on MultiTypeRow - Auto-format eprintln! statements

…ction Allow users to query their own User entity by email while still protecting other users' emails from enumeration. - Add CellFilterExpression::ActorId variant for dynamic actor comparison - Add CellFilter::NotEqual for uuid != ActorId conditions - Add lifetime parameters to CellFilter types for borrowed data - Update hash_default() to use All([type=User, uuid!=ActorId]) - Add integration tests for ActorId validation (positive/negative cases) - Update unit tests for new exclusion filter structure

vercel · 2026-01-28T12:29:24Z

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

2 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign	Ignored	Preview	Jan 28, 2026 1:35pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Jan 28, 2026 1:35pm

TimDiekmann · 2026-01-28T12:29:51Z

BE-310: Protect sensitive properties from enumeration attacks #8332 👈 (View in Graphite)
main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

codecov · 2026-01-28T12:34:28Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 86.30807% with 56 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.30%. Comparing base (2105a2d) to head (6fb86a1).
⚠️ Report is 20 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...postgres-store/src/store/postgres/query/compile.rs	58.69%	18 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...store/src/store/postgres/query/property_masking.rs	89.38%	18 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...s-store/src/store/postgres/knowledge/entity/mod.rs	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
...cal/graph/postgres-store/src/store/postgres/mod.rs	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
...h-ai-worker-ts/src/activities/shared/embeddings.ts	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
...al/graph/postgres-store/src/store/postgres/pool.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8332      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   60.19%   60.30%   +0.11%     
==========================================
  Files        1232     1233       +1     
  Lines      118007   118398     +391     
  Branches     5135     5146      +11     
==========================================
+ Hits        71029    71402     +373     
- Misses      46152    46168      +16     
- Partials      826      828       +2

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	`1.41% <0.00%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️
apps.hash-api	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-graph-sdk	`10.88% <ø> (ø)`
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.error-stack	`90.88% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-tower	`66.80% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-types	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
rust.harpc-wire-protocol	`92.23% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-api	`2.88% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-authorization	`62.47% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	`27.26% <86.73%> (+1.65%)`	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning	`47.95% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hash-graph-validation	`83.45% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-compiletest	`46.65% <ø> (ø)`
rust.hashql-eval	`68.54% <ø> (ø)`

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.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

codspeed-hq · 2026-01-28T12:35:34Z

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will not alter performance

_{Comparing t/be-310-dont-allow-filtering-users-by-email (6fb86a1) with main (8e4d972)¹}

Summary

✅ 18 untouched benchmarks
🗄️ 12 archived benchmarks run²

No successful run was found on main (1205c42) during the generation of this report, so 8e4d972 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩
12 benchmarks were run, but are now archived. If they were deleted in another branch, consider rebasing to remove them from the report. Instead if they were added back, click here to restore them. ↩

Implement JSONB key deletion to remove protected properties from entity responses at the database level. Properties like email are now masked directly in SQL SELECT statements, ensuring they never leave the database unless the actor is the entity owner. - Add CaseWhen, JsonDeleteKeys, ArrayConcat, ArrayLiteral expressions - Implement property_masking module for building masking expressions - Integrate masking into SelectCompiler for Properties and PropertyMetadata - Add integration tests for response masking and sorting protection - Add unit tests for masked expression generation

github-actions · 2026-01-28T14:47:45Z

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$26.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 163 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.565 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.377 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.013 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$42.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.122 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$13.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 92.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$23.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 129 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.054 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 192 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-38.665 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.59 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-81.761 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-63.119 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.288 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.86 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.557 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.627 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.165 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.280 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$4.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.816 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.83 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.368 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.391 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.58 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.51 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.45 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.15 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.70 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.97 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.31 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.47 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.09 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.49 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$42.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 138 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$78.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 327 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$47.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 202 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$50.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 350 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}11.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$59.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 373 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}12.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$44.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 178 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$414 \mathrm{ms} \pm 879 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.164 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$98.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 479 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.98 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$88.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 305 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$288 \mathrm{ms} \pm 780 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.526 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$18.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}21.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$18.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}18.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$18.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}20.3 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$19.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 102 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}26.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$24.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 115 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}34.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$18.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}26.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$19.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 103 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}32.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$18.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 88.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}28.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$19.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 101 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}25.6 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$31.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 276 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}40.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1`	$$44.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 518 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}52.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1`	$$42.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 537 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}46.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1`	$$44.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 400 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}52.5 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1`	$$45.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 480 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}54.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2`	$$45.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 434 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}51.2 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1`	$$45.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 497 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}52.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1`	$$42.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 443 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}46.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1`	$$44.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 459 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}47.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: `https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1`	$$44.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 448 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}43.9 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: `bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba`	$$8.18 \mathrm{ms} \pm 32.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.937 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$90.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 613 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}102 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$138 \mathrm{ms} \pm 517 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}46.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$98.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 464 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}92.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$106 \mathrm{ms} \pm 457 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}76.6 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$114 \mathrm{ms} \pm 468 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}67.9 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$122 \mathrm{ms} \pm 475 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}63.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$85.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 392 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}74.6 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$112 \mathrm{ms} \pm 558 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}47.8 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$91.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 432 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}65.4 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$99.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 416 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}56.7 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$102 \mathrm{ms} \pm 538 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}56.0 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$102 \mathrm{ms} \pm 443 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}55.2 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$138 \mathrm{ms} \pm 539 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$133 \mathrm{ms} \pm 572 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$42.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-59.358 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$583 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.02 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-3.022 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

TimDiekmann added 10 commits January 24, 2026 20:22

Update Rust formatting command in lefthook pre-commit hook

c4d421e

BE-310: Skip filter transformation when protection config is empty

1d22d65

Add early check for empty FilterProtectionConfig to avoid unnecessary filter transformation when no properties are protected.

BE-310: Fix clippy warnings in filter protection tests

d6fb552

- Remove unused #[expect(clippy::struct_excessive_bools)] on MultiTypeRow - Auto-format eprintln! statements

github-actions bot added area/apps > hash* Affects HASH (a `hash-*` app) area/libs Relates to first-party libraries/crates/packages (area) type/eng > backend Owned by the @backend team area/tests New or updated tests area/apps area/apps > hash-graph labels Jan 28, 2026

vercel bot deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 28, 2026 12:34 View deployment

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 28, 2026 12:42 View deployment

vercel bot temporarily deployed to Preview – petrinaut January 28, 2026 13:34 Inactive

vercel bot deployed to Preview – hash January 28, 2026 13:46 View deployment

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

BE-310: Protect sensitive properties from enumeration attacks #8332

BE-310: Protect sensitive properties from enumeration attacks #8332

TimDiekmann commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

TimDiekmann commented Jan 28, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 28, 2026

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

BE-310: Protect sensitive properties from enumeration attacks #8332

Are you sure you want to change the base?

BE-310: Protect sensitive properties from enumeration attacks #8332

Conversation

TimDiekmann commented Jan 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

🔍 What does this change?

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

🛡 What tests cover this?

❓ How to test this?

Uh oh!

vercel bot commented Jan 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

TimDiekmann commented Jan 28, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging this PR will not alter performance

Summary

Footnotes

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 28, 2026

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

policy_resolution_medium

policy_resolution_none

policy_resolution_small

read_scaling_complete

read_scaling_linkless

representative_read_entity

representative_read_entity_type

representative_read_multiple_entities

scenarios

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

TimDiekmann commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

vercel bot commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codspeed-hq bot commented Jan 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading