-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
ref(feedback): Add enhanced privacy to feedback alerts #12418
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good overall, just a couple questions
@@ -4,8 +4,14 @@ | |||
|
|||
{{ report.name }} left a new comment: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it ok to display the reporter's name if enhanced privacy is enabled?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably our call. The company requesting this said they're fine with the username -- only concerned about the content of the feedback being hidden.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's probably fine for now then, maybe a product decision.
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ <h2>{{ activity_name }}</h2> | |||
|
|||
{% endblock %} | |||
|
|||
{% if group %} | |||
{% if group and not enhanced_privacy %} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we hide the group information here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The enhanced privacy setting says it hides PII and source code. Does the stacktrace in the group information count as source code?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep, definitely would. Sounds good to hide it here then!
* master: (36 commits) Revert "feat(app-platform): Open in stacktrace button (#12401)" fix(app-platform): Unsubscribe from Store changes (#12445) feat(app-platform): Open in stacktrace button (#12401) ref(project transfer): Add explanatory sentence to modal (#12427) feat(features): Add org saved searches [SEN-355] (#12441) add project to payload (#12407) feat(app-platform): Issue Link UI (#12345) fix(api): Fix bug where parser didn't allow dates ending in `Z`, and didn't correctly report the parse fail to the user (ISSUE-376) Add enhanced privacy to feedback (#12418) fix: Add sentry tag to renormalized events (#12434) dev: Ensure docker binds to an interface EventCommon mixin for common event functionality (#12422) build(webpack): Only show errors in webpack output (#12425) ref(ui): Remove unused utils (#12424) ref: Sample to_python calls 2 (#12375) feat(eventtypes): Keep value retained for synthetic errors (#12355) fix: Fix UI side to deal with invalid values (#12433) ref(grouping): Added initial pass of new grouping algorithm (#12414) build(webpack): Fix incremental webpack builds (upgrade to node@8.15.1) (#12408) Revert "feat: Common functionality for Snuba Events (#11071)" (#12421) ...
…12432) * feat(grouping): Add project option to force grouping and persit it * feat(grouping): Expose the grouping config forcing through the api * ref: Improved grouping config selectiong * feat(grouping): Add grouping config to the UI (feature flagged) * meta: Bump semaphore to 0.4.20 * ref: Move grouping config freeze into normalize and change apis * ref: Cleaned up config code * ref: Add config ID to the grouping info output * fix(api): Fix bug where parser didn't allow dates ending in `Z`, and didn't correctly report the parse fail to the user (ISSUE-376) Our parser didn't allow for dates with `Z` at the end, so updated the regex to allow. Also fixed a bug where if a date started with a valid date but ended with invalid input then we'd create a search filter from the valid input, then shove the invalid input into `message` rather than raising a parse error. Fixes (ISSUE-376) * Add enhanced privacy to feedback (#12418) * feat(app-platform): Issue Link UI (#12345) This change takes care of dynamically rendering the Link and Create forms for Sentry Apps that support Issue Link components. * add project to payload (#12407) * feat: Added grouping selector on grouping info page * feat: Added tooltip * test: Improve test coverage for grouping * ref: Slightly improved native grouping * ref: More cleanup in new grouping algorithm * ref: rename a misnamed function
If the organization enhanced privacy flag is enabled, hide user feedback comments in email notifications. For healthcare companies, for example, PHI can be left in user feedback and shouldn't be sent via email.