Skip to content

fix: omit creator email from v2 asset responses - #249

Merged
stefan-ernst merged 1 commit into
Windshiftapp:mainfrom
Optic00:codex/v2-asset-creator-privacy
Sep 9, 2026
Merged

fix: omit creator email from v2 asset responses#249
stefan-ernst merged 1 commit into
Windshiftapp:mainfrom
Optic00:codex/v2-asset-creator-privacy

Conversation

@Optic00

@Optic00 Optic00 commented Sep 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

API-v2 asset responses include the creator's email even when the bearer token cannot access the user API. V1 deliberately omitted this information from assets.

This restores that boundary for asset creation, detail reads, updates and lists. Both V2 mounts use the same representation. Creator identity and other asset fields remain available; the email must be obtained through the separately permission-checked user API. Single-asset response redaction copies the model instead of changing service-owned state.

The HTTP regression fails on Core cbd4f521 for all four operations on both mounts and passes with this fix. It uses synthetic accounts, verifies a nonempty source email, confirms that the asset-only token cannot read /users/me, and checks that asset identity survives redaction.

All nine retained V1 scenarios remain covered, alongside V2 equivalents and outsider, Viewer, Editor and Administrator checks with persisted outcomes. The asset/CLI-asset subset passes on SQLite and PostgreSQL with this branch.

Tests are in the companion test branch. Kept in draft alongside the ongoing API-v2 test migration. No production instance was accessed.

@Optic00
Optic00 marked this pull request as ready for review September 8, 2026 05:48
@stefan-ernst
stefan-ernst merged commit 7523bda into Windshiftapp:main Sep 9, 2026
18 checks passed
@stefan-ernst

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you, good find! Still working on corrections for v2 api, this is a useful one

@Optic00
Optic00 deleted the codex/v2-asset-creator-privacy branch September 12, 2026 17:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants