[integrity] DIFC Integrity-Filtered Events Report — 2026-03-25 #22968
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
This discussion has been marked as outdated by Daily DIFC Integrity-Filtered Events Analyzer. A newer discussion is available at Discussion #23272. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Executive Summary
In the last 7 days, 60 DIFC integrity-filtered events were detected across 20 workflow runs (out of 31 total runs analyzed). The most frequently filtered tools were
list_issues(31 events, 52%) andissue_read(22 events, 37%). The dominant filter reason was integrity — all 60 events were blocked because resources had integrity below the"approved"threshold. The activity is concentrated on 2026-03-25 (56 events), with only 4 events on 2026-03-24, indicating essentially all filtering activity happened on a single day.Two workflows dominate the filtered events: AI Moderator and Auto-Triage Issues account for 20 events each (33% apiece). This is expected behavior — both workflows are designed to read issue/PR content created by external contributors, who receive
none:allintegrity tags by default. The filtering rate is high because the repository has active community contributions from accounts not yet granted approved integrity. TheThe Daily Repository Chronicleworkflow (12 events) also stands out — its scheduled bulklist_issuesscan generates cluster-style filtering events.Key Metrics
list_issues(31 events, 52%)none:all(60 events)unapproved:alltag prevalenceszabta89(14 events)📈 Events Over Time
The filtering is heavily concentrated on 2026-03-25 (56 of 60 events), with only 4 events on 2026-03-24. This is not a worrying trend — it reflects the natural cadence of new issues and PRs being opened on the same day by contributors without approved-integrity status. The 4-event baseline on March 24 was driven by Auto-Triage Issues processing
dsyme's contributor-tagged issues (#22785, #22784).🔧 Top Filtered Tools
list_issues(31) andissue_read(22) account for 88% of all filtered events.list_issuesis a bulk-read operation — a single call can yield many filtered items in one shot, explaining why the Daily Repository Chronicle and Daily Team Evolution Insights generate clusters.issue_readis a targeted single-read commonly used by AI Moderator and Auto-Triage Issues when processing individual issues or comments.search_pull_requests(4) andsearch_issues(2) are secondary, withpull_request_readappearing only once (Code Simplifier).🏷️ Filter Reasons and Tags
All 60 events carry the
none:allintegrity tag, meaning the triggering resources (issues/PRs) were authored by accounts with no approved integrity designation. 31 of those also carryunapproved:all, indicating the resource was explicitly tagged as unapproved. No secrecy-tag filtering was observed — this is a purely integrity-driven filtering profile. The pie chart shows that AI Moderator and Auto-Triage Issues are co-equal top contributors at ~33% each.📋 Per-Workflow Breakdown
📋 Per-Server Breakdown
👤 Per-User Breakdown (all triggering authors)
🔍 Per-User Analysis
The per-user distribution reveals that the spike is entirely driven by community contributors and external users — no bot accounts (e.g.,
github-actions[bot]) appear in the filtered events. The top two actors areszabta89(14 events) anddsyme(12 events), both labeled as CONTRIBUTORs. Their issues/PRs were repeatedly encountered across multiple workflow runs on the same day, generating duplicate filter events (e.g., issue #22784 was blocked in 5 separate runs). This is expected: a single open issue from a non-approved contributor will be re-filtered every time a workflow scans the issue list. The repeated filtering of issues #22785, #22784, #22913, #22908, #22894, #22902, #22904 is a direct consequence of multiple concurrent workflow instances processing the same open issue set.💡 Tuning Recommendations
Approve high-frequency external contributors:
szabta89anddsymeare CONTRIBUTORs whose content is being blocked in every workflow run that scans open issues. If their contributions are trusted, granting themapprovedintegrity designation would immediately reduce filtered event volume by ~43% (26 of 60 events).Deduplicate repeated
list_issuesfiltering: The Daily Repository Chronicle, Daily Team Evolution Insights, and Auto-Triage Issues all independently scan open issues and re-block the same set of low-integrity resources. Consider a shared pre-filter step or a cache layer that marks issues as "already integrity-checked" to avoid redundant filter events across concurrent scheduled runs.Issue MCP Gateway v0.1.8: tools/call still returns HTTP 400 for Streamable HTTP backends #19652, actions-lock.json - consider renaming #22784, Pins in actions-lock.json can drift out of sync with workflow #22785 as persistent blockers: These issues appear in filters across many runs (4, 7, and 7 events respectively). They are long-standing open issues with
none:allintegrity. They will continue to cause filtering until either the authors are approved or the issues are closed. Flag these for maintainer review.Add
author_loginto all filter events: 5 events haveunknownauthor_login due to partial DIFC redaction (the event itself is redacted). Ensuring complete author attribution in gateway logs would improve accountability and make per-user analysis more accurate.Review
pull_request_readfiltering in Code Simplifier: The Code Simplifier workflow encountered a filteredpull_request_readfor PR feat: prevent GitHub App safe-outputs from self-cancelling issue_comment workflows #22825 (none:alltag). If this workflow needs to process externally-submitted PRs, it should either be granted broader read access with appropriate integrity controls, or the target PR should be explicitly approved before the workflow processes it.Monitor for filter volume growth: The current rate (~60 events/day when contributors are active) is within acceptable bounds. If the rate doubles as community contributions grow, re-evaluate the approval process to avoid widespread blocking of legitimate contributor content.
Generated by the Daily Integrity Analysis workflow
Analysis window: Last 7 days | Repository: github/gh-aw
Run: §23561462519
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions