spec/security: field masking is all-or-nothing — no partial masking (phone last-4, ID middle-8), and maskingRule was pruned as dead in 2026-06

Summary

Field-level masking today has exactly two states: fully readable, or fully masked.

requiredPermissions (ADR-0066 D3) — "mask on read, deny on write", an all-or-nothing gate.
type: 'secret' — encrypted at rest, opaque ref on the row, masked on read. Correct for credentials, wrong shape for business PII.

There is no way to declare partial masking: show the last 4 digits of a phone number, mask the middle 8 of a national ID, keep the surname and mask the given name, show the last 4 of a bank account.

History — this is a re-introduction, not a new idea

maskingRule existed as a declarable key and was deliberately removed in the 2026-06 dead-surface prune (packages/spec/src/data/field.zod.ts):

// Pruned 2026-06 (dead in both layers — aspirational governance with no runtime
// consumer; encryption/masking implied at-rest protection that never happened —
// the real channel is type:'secret'). See
// docs/audits/2026-06-dead-surface-disposition-plan.md (P0/P2 field prune):
// encryptionConfig, maskingRule, auditTrail, cached, dataQuality.

That prune was right under ADR-0049 enforce-or-remove — the key promised protection the runtime never delivered. This issue is therefore explicitly a request for the runtime capability first, with the metadata key re-introduced only as its authoring surface. Re-adding a declarable maskingRule without enforcement would just recreate the dead surface that was removed.

Why it matters

Found while scoping a bank CRM RFI (VTB Shanghai SME), where "敏感字段脱敏" (sensitive-field masking) is a stated security requirement and had to be quoted as custom work.

Partial masking is the normal form of the control in Chinese PIPL practice — regulators and internal audit expect masked-but-recognisable values so staff can still verify identity over the phone without seeing the full number. All-or-nothing masking fails both ways: fully visible leaks, fully hidden breaks the workflow.

What's already right

The enforcement channel is sound and should be reused as-is: masking is applied by the runtime FieldMasker, not by the UI, so an API caller is masked identically to a browser user — there is no bypass path. Partial masking should ride that same channel rather than introduce a second one. (It also already applies before AI tool output reaches model context, per the enterprise AI-governance interceptor, so a partial rule would inherit that for free.)

Suggested shape

A declarable rule on the field — named presets (phone, id_card, bank_account, email, name) plus a keep-head/keep-tail form for the long tail.
Applied in FieldMasker alongside the existing all-or-nothing path, gated by the same permission evaluation.
Masked value must be stable (same input → same output) so it doesn't break list rendering or grouping.
Export path must honour it — masking that applies on screen but not in CSV is the failure mode auditors look for.

Verified against

0f539bd — packages/spec/src/data/field.zod.ts (lines ~765–780 prune note, ~838–854 requiredPermissions / ackPlaintextMasking, ~988 secret).

Triage: needs-user-decision + domain:spec (re-introducing a declarable field key changes the spec acceptance surface; runtime enforcement rides the FieldMasker channel). Type: Feature. Manual floor: capability addition + contract-shape change — and a deliberate reversal of the 2026-06 dead-surface prune, which only the maintainer should sanction.

Background

Masking today is binary (requiredPermissions mask-on-read; type:'secret'). No partial masking (phone last-4, ID middle-8). maskingRule was pruned 2026-06 under ADR-0049 as declared-but-unenforced. Same bank CRM RFI as #8992; partial masking is the normal form of this control in PIPL practice.

Premises (re-check before acting)

Prune note still present: git grep -n "maskingRule" origin/main -- packages/spec/src/data/field.zod.ts
Single enforcement channel: git grep -rln "FieldMasker" origin/main -- packages | head

The question

Re-introduce partial masking as a runtime-first capability with a declarable rule (named presets + keep-head/keep-tail), riding the existing FieldMasker channel?

Options

A. Accept runtime-first: FieldMasker gains partial rules; the declarable key lands only in the same PR series as its enforcement; export path honours it; closed preset enum (phone, id_card, bank_account, email, name) + keep-head/keep-tail escape hatch.
B. UI-side (render-time) masking only — cheaper, but creates the API bypass the current design correctly avoids.
C. Defer.

Recommendation — A

Measured business pull: stated requirement in a live RFI, currently quoted as custom work; masked-but-recognisable values are what auditors accept and what phone-verification workflows need in the target market.
Platform long-term coherence: one enforcement channel (runtime FieldMasker — API caller and browser user masked identically; the AI-context interceptor inherits it for free). B forks the channel and is the exact failure mode auditors probe (screen masked, CSV not).
AI-agent error-resistance: closed preset enum over free-form format strings; the key re-enters the schema only with enforcement attached, so the prune stays honoured in spirit (declare = enforce); stable output (same input → same masked value) keeps list rendering and grouping deterministic.
Startup scope discipline: this reverses a deliberate removal, so the burden of proof is pull — which now exists and is quantified. Scope stays at presets + head/tail; no per-role rule matrices until asked.

Four-edge block:

Platform long-term coherence: single masking channel preserved; contract grows by one enforced key + closed enum.
Measured business pull: PIPL-practice standard; live RFI line item currently quoted as custom work.
AI-agent error-resistance: closed presets; declaration lands only with enforcement (no resurrected dead surface).
Startup scope discipline: prune reversal justified only by measured pull; MVP presets only.

Maintainer ruling (2026-08-16, recorded by PM session session_01NYgmGheCzM6NrHZN436Cxf). Ruled together with #8992 as one strategic decision. Verbatim: 「主线二：批 A+A = 宣布进入监管行业市场（企业级合规包方向）」 — i.e. both cards' Option A approved, explicitly framed as entering the regulated-industry market with an enterprise compliance bundle direction.

Ruled: Option A — partial masking as a runtime-first capability.

Scope pins (from the triage recommendation, now binding):

Rides the existing FieldMasker channel only — no second (UI-side) channel; API caller and browser user masked identically; the AI-context interceptor inherits it.
Closed preset enum (phone, id_card, bank_account, email, name) + keep-head/keep-tail escape hatch. No per-role rule matrices until asked.
The declarable key lands only in the same PR series as its enforcement — the 2026-06 prune stays honoured in spirit (declare = enforce; no resurrected dead surface).
Masked output stable (same input → same output); export path honours the rule.

Dispatch notes: domain:spec (declarable key = accept-surface change) ⇒ claude-fable-5 tier mandatory. Pairs with #8992 as the compliance bundle; packaging split (open-runtime seam vs enterprise policy) follows the existing AI-governance precedent.

Label flipped needs-user-decision → pm:queue in the same stroke.

Generated by Claude Code

Claim: PM loop round 6
Session: session_01225pUjnCKWqxcc1PeqKFUq
Branch: claude/issue-8993-partial-masking-runtime-first
Worktree: objectstack-issue-8993 (+ sibling worktrees per repo if enforcement spans one — measure first)
Domain: domain:spec
File surface: the ruled scope only — packages/spec/src/data/field.zod.ts (declarable partial-masking rule: closed preset enum + keep-head/keep-tail), the FieldMasker enforcement channel (locate on today's tree — expected plugin-security family), export-path honouring, tests, one changeset, regenerated references (field pages) (stop on breach; explain in the report)
Container & model: M (ruled feature with pinned scope), mode:subagent, model: fable — mandatory (accept-surface addition; the ruling's dispatch note mandates it)
Serial constraints cleared: ⚠️ same-file churn — #9113 (field.zod.ts placeholder) is landing right now: branch off current origin/main AND re-merge after #9113 lands before finalizing; both edits touch FieldSchema, declare region-level care. File-disjoint from in-flight #9040 (driver/mongo.zod.ts). The ruling's binding scope pins (single FieldMasker channel · closed presets phone/id_card/bank_account/email/name + keep-head/keep-tail · declarable key lands ONLY in the same PR series as its enforcement · stable masked output · export path honours it · no per-role matrices) are on the adjudication comment above — they are 裁决, not suggestions.

Generated by Claude Code

feat(spec,plugin-security): partial field masking — maskingRule prese…

test(rest): pin export screen-vs-CSV parity for partial masking; add …

regenerate artifacts on the merged tree (post-#9113 merge) (#8993)

gates: ADR-0122 alias form + Iso850 pin; translate the new maskingRul…

{
  "issue": 8993,
  "status": "done",
  "branch": "claude/issue-8993-partial-masking-runtime-first",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/9128",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "summary": "Both adjudication premises re-verified on today's main (prune note present at field.zod.ts:989; FieldMasker in plugin-security; export streams through findData -> engine middleware, so NO export bypass exists — the PM's maskable-seam assumption held, no scope fork). Implemented the full ruled scope in one PR: FieldSchema.maskingRule (closed presets phone/id_card/bank_account/email/name + keepHead/keepTail, ADR-0122 alias + Iso850 pin, guidance tombstone flipped per the #9113 placeholder precedent, live liveness row, forms + translated form strings) and its FieldMasker enforcement in the same PR — deterministic/idempotent length-preserving masks; requiredPermissions is the unmask gate (same ADR-0066 D3 evaluation, delegator-intersected per D10); explicit permission-set denies still delete; masked-for-caller fields are non-filterable/sortable/groupable/aggregatable (403, oracle guard); masked-echo writes refused 400 VALIDATION_ERROR; getReadableFields keeps masked columns so export headers match served rows; export parity pinned screen-vs-CSV. Packaging: everything in the open runtime per the AI-governance precedent (enterprise inherits the channel, adds nothing parallel). #9113 landed mid-task and was re-merged via os-regen-merge.sh with artifacts regenerated on the merged tree; both keys verified present. One PM-visible judgment call flagged in the PR: a rule with no requiredPermissions masks every non-system caller (declare = enforce from first read) rather than sitting inert.",
  "tests": "Union re-run at final commit 54cda1e3b (post-#9113 merge): plugin-security 66 files/1276 tests green; spec 406 files/10781 tests green; rest 120 files/2003 tests green; typechecks green (spec incl. test layer, plugin-security, rest, platform-objects). Gates at head: check:generated 'All 13 generated artifacts are up to date'; check:liveness green (maskingRule row live, counts regenerated 846->847); check:i18n 'OK (9 packages)'; check:i18n-coverage 'none new'; check:spec-parsed-alias 'OK' (after ADR-0122 fix, 837 pinned); ratchet family green (type-check-coverage 'none above its recorded number', type-check-debt, engine-double-contract, where-matcher, query-options-erasure); nul-bytes, merge-driver, cross-package-test-inputs, changeset gates (adr-0087-registration, no-major, empty), dev-prereqs green; examples validate crm/showcase/todo exit 0. Beyond the prompt's named list, the diff-derived run (scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs) added check:spec-parsed-alias (went red, fixed: z.input alias + Iso850) and check:i18n (went red, fixed: bundles regenerated + hand-translated). CI on PR #9128 is in_progress — reported at draft-PR time per contract.",
  "open_questions": [],
  "out_of_scope_findings": ["filed as #9127: security explain's field-mask layer reports binary readable/masked only — gated maskingRule fields read as fully hidden, gate-less rule fields as fully readable; should mirror computePartialMaskRules"]
}

Generated by Claude Code

ACCEPT (content) — PR #9128 (claude/issue-8993-partial-masking-runtime-first, reviewed at head 54cda1e3b). Verified against GitHub, not the report's self-description. Ready-flip waits only on CI convergence.

Every binding scope pin honored: single FieldMasker channel (no UI-side fork); closed preset enum + keepHead/keepTail, no free-form strings, no per-role matrices; declare = enforce in one PR (the 2026-06 prune's spirit kept — the key returns only with its runtime consumer, tombstone flipped per the feat(spec): declare placeholder on FieldSchema — Option C ruling on objectui#4676 (#9019) #9113 precedent, liveness row live); deterministic/idempotent masks; export parity measured, not assumed — export streams through findData → the same engine middleware, and the screen-vs-CSV byte-parity suite pins the auditors' probe.
Security-shape quality: the no-oracle fold (masked fields refuse filter/sort/group/aggregate — equality probes would reconstruct the span), the masked-echo write refusal (round-tripped 138****5678 cannot silently overwrite the stored value, while privileged imports stay possible), explicit permission-set denies still win over masking, and D10 delegator intersection on the unmask gate.
Packaging per the AI-governance precedent: key, presets, AND engine all in the open runtime — a community deployment enforces a declared rule too; the enterprise bundle composes on top, nothing parallel created.
Three judgment calls, recorded for the maintainer (all within the ruled frame, all conservative in the security direction): ① a rule WITHOUT requiredPermissions masks every non-system caller — the inert-until-gated alternative would recreate the dead-declaration class the prune removed; ② masked read does not deny write (CRM workflow), made safe by the echo guard; ③ sort-by-masked-column is refused; relaxing is a deliberate follow-up if UX pull appears.
Two derivation-added gates went red and were fixed pre-CI (spec-parsed-alias: ADR-0122 alias + Iso850; i18n: bundles regenerated + hand-translated) — the [finding] check:i18n is invisible to dispatch-gates path derivation — a spec .form.ts change moves platform-objects bundles but no derived gate list names the family #9116 gap class, caught by the dev's own re-derivation this time. feat(spec): declare placeholder on FieldSchema — Option C ruling on objectui#4676 (#9019) #9113 mid-task churn handled via os-regen-merge.sh with both keys verified on the merged tree. Residual filed as security explain: the field-mask layer does not report partial masking (maskingRule) — gated fields read as fully hidden, gate-less rule fields as fully readable #9127 (explain engine's binary mask reporting), not folded in.

Landing: touches regenerated artifacts — relay discipline at queueing if main moves on those faces; flip ready + auto-merge at gate green.

Generated by Claude Code

Triage sweep: added pm:blocking (cache derived from the Blocked-by: index — #9127, the explain-engine partial-mask reporting follow-up, queues behind this card's landing). No action needed from the executing seat; the downstream card unlocks on your merge.

Generated by Claude Code

feat(spec,plugin-security): partial field masking — maskingRule prese…

fix(security): explain's field-mask layer reports partial masking (#9127

tests(access-security): pin the FLS read side and the persona x CRUD …

fix(approvals): stop pushing a free-text predicate onto a masked payl…

fix(security): explain's field-mask layer reports partial masking (ob…

tests(access-security): pin the FLS read side and the persona x CRUD …

fix(approvals): stop pushing a free-text predicate onto a masked payl…

test(spec): the second data/ file group's test titles state each cite…

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

spec/security: field masking is all-or-nothing — no partial masking (phone last-4, ID middle-8), and `maskingRule` was pruned as dead in 2026-06 #8993

Summary

History — this is a re-introduction, not a new idea

Why it matters

What's already right

Suggested shape

Verified against

Background

Premises (re-check before acting)

The question

Options

Recommendation — A

Related

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

spec/security: field masking is all-or-nothing — no partial masking (phone last-4, ID middle-8), and maskingRule was pruned as dead in 2026-06 #8993

Description

Summary

History — this is a re-introduction, not a new idea

Why it matters

What's already right

Suggested shape

Verified against

Activity

os-project-manager commented on Aug 16, 2026

Background

Premises (re-check before acting)

The question

Options

Recommendation — A

Related

os-zhuang commented on Aug 16, 2026

os-zhuang commented on Aug 16, 2026

os-zhuang commented on Aug 16, 2026

os-zhuang commented on Aug 16, 2026

os-project-manager commented on Aug 16, 2026

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

spec/security: field masking is all-or-nothing — no partial masking (phone last-4, ID middle-8), and `maskingRule` was pruned as dead in 2026-06 #8993