mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-09 16:02:36 +01:00
DottaandPaperclip
6ec4180ea1
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - Run diagnostics help operators find the cause of a failed agent run. > - The failure reporter treated unknown environment settings as credentials. > - It replaced every use of those values in diagnostic text. > - A flag set to `1`, `2`, or `safe` removed parts of dates, model names, versions, and normal words. > - This pull request preserves explicit ordinary settings and keeps unknown values private. > - Operators can read the failure details while real credentials stay masked. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** Run-failure contexts contained redaction markers inside timestamps, model names, driver versions, and the word "safely". Provider failure diagnostics used the same broad environment-value rule. **Expected behavior** Ordinary flags, counts, paths, regions, and mode labels leave diagnostic text readable. API keys, URL passwords, and declared secret bindings remain masked. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Set ordinary environment settings to `1`, `2`, and `safe`. 2. Report a failed native run with a timestamp, `gpt-6.1-sol`, `phase6-v2`, and "safely" in its details. 3. Inspect the run failure report. Before this fix, unrelated fragments are replaced. Related work: #13668 addresses a separate model-ID false positive. #11311 and #15524 address credential capture at other boundaries. This change keeps the existing command scanner and registered-secret replacement. ## What Changed - Add a shared environment selector in adapter-utils. Keep unknown values private. Exempt explicit ordinary process settings, typed flags and counts, mode labels, and key selectors. - Use the same selector for run-failure reports and inherited provider failure environments. Keep one policy for both consumers. - Keep configured provider bindings private because that API does not carry separate secret-reference metadata. - Preserve short declared secrets, unknown opaque values, encoded credentials, and inherited Bedrock tokens. Add regressions for ordinary `SORT_KEY` values and both Bedrock consumers. - Add screenshot-shaped regressions, real database reporter coverage, and credential tests. - Document the policy in `doc/observability.md`. The optional monitoring gate stays in place. ## Verification Linux, Node v25.9.0, pnpm 9.15.4. The published tree matches the tested local tree `cb236f072cca195e4c2cfb4034c7cc06ea7adbc5`. - Before the fix, four diagnostic regressions failed. The output reproduced the damaged timestamp, model, version, and word. - Review regressions: six tests failed on the first revision. They proved the missed Bedrock token, opaque inherited-value exposure, and key-selector false positive. All pass after the correction. - 555 focused tests pass on the final source tree. - `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run src/services/__tests__/run-failure-diagnostics.test.ts src/__tests__/redaction.test.ts src/__tests__/redact-sensitive.test.ts src/__tests__/run-secret-redaction.test.ts`: 206 passed. - `cd server && pnpm exec vitest run src/services/__tests__/run-failure-report.test.ts`: 289 passed, with real embedded PostgreSQL. - `pnpm exec vitest run packages/adapter-utils/src/command-redaction.test.ts packages/adapter-utils/src/acpx-engine/terminal-session-failure.test.ts`: 60 passed. - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/adapter-utils typecheck`: passed. - `git diff --check`: passed. - The first reporter attempt could not load the unbuilt plugin SDK. It passed after `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/plugin-sdk ensure-build-deps`. - The filtered install omitted the CLI tsx loader, so `pnpm verify --explain` could not start. The equivalent verifier entry points ran with the installed server loader and returned exit 2: broader CI coverage is required for the observability document. - Full local build/typecheck and browser suites were not duplicated. [Final-revision CI](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/actions/runs/42231412547) passed on `013960a4c6fa6279e1f28b0f6af5f036d7cad5a7`, attempt 1. This includes typecheck, build, general/server/chat tests, serialized suites, Runner checks, eight E2E shards, and the canary dry run. - [Greptile review](https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip/pull/19461#issuecomment-6686592783) scored this head 5/5 with zero new findings. All four inline threads are resolved. The security rescan and Snyk status passed. The PR has no merge conflicts. ## Risks - Ordinary-setting exemptions need a known name or a name/value type rule. Unknown opaque values remain private. Declared secret bindings and recognizable credentials override these exemptions. - A real short secret still masks matching fragments. Removing that protection would expose the secret. - Existing stored redaction markers cannot restore their original text. This fix applies when new diagnostics are produced. - No migration, dependency, workflow, authorization, or default monitoring changes. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. This change is a focused bug fix. ## Model Used OpenAI GPT-6, through Codex, with shell execution and file tools. The host does not expose the exact runtime variant or context window size. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>