----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/73920/#review224225 -----------------------------------------------------------
agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyevaluator/RangerDefaultDataMaskPolicyItemEvaluator.java Line 48 (original), 48 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/73920/#comment313112> Why is "!result.getIsAccessDetermined()" necessary? When mask policy is evaluated, the access is not determined, and will always be false making this condition always true. agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyevaluator/RangerDefaultDataMaskPolicyItemEvaluator.java Lines 52 (patched) <https://reviews.apache.org/r/73920/#comment313113> Why the masking policy needs to make decision about access here? - Abhay Kulkarni On March 29, 2022, 9:11 p.m., Madhan Neethiraj wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/73920/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 29, 2022, 9:11 p.m.) > > > Review request for ranger, Ankita Sinha, Kishor Gollapalliwar, Abhay > Kulkarni, Mehul Parikh, Pradeep Agrawal, Ramesh Mani, and Sailaja Polavarapu. > > > Bugs: RANGER-3688 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-3688 > > > Repository: ranger > > > Description > ------- > > updated masking policy evaluation to enable policies with override priority > to override decision made by normal priority policy > > > Diffs > ----- > > > agents-common/src/main/java/org/apache/ranger/plugin/policyevaluator/RangerDefaultDataMaskPolicyItemEvaluator.java > 558212471 > > agents-common/src/test/resources/policyengine/test_policyengine_tag_hive_mask.json > a97bd2b77 > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/73920/diff/1/ > > > Testing > ------- > > - updated unit tests for this use case > - verified that all existing unit tests pass successfully > > > Thanks, > > Madhan Neethiraj > >
