Skip to content

Fix replicate to foreign server without PDPA #21978

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
Sameerlite merged 1 commit into from
Feb 24, 2026
Merged

Fix replicate to foreign server without PDPA #21978

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions ...drails/guardrail_hooks/litellm_content_filter/policy_templates/sg_pdpa_data_transfer.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -16,6 +16,8 @@ identifier_words:
- "SG resident data"
- "PDPA data"
- "Singapore employee data"
# PDPA alone implies Singapore regulatory context
- "PDPA"
Copy link
Contributor

@greptile-apps greptile-apps bot Feb 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Broad identifier may cause false positives

Adding bare "PDPA" as an identifier word means any sentence mentioning "PDPA" alongside any additional_block_words entry will trigger a block. Since identifier matching uses case-insensitive substring matching (if identifier in sentence_lower), this could block legitimate requests like:

  • "How do I export data under PDPA?" (matches identifier "pdpa" + block word "export")
  • "Is PDPA relevant when I copy to another department?" (matches "pdpa" + "copy to")

These seem like informational queries that should be allowed. The existing exceptions ("explain", "what is", "how to comply") won't cover all such cases.

Consider whether a more specific phrase like "PDPA data" (already present at line 17) or "under PDPA" would be sufficient, or add more exceptions to guard against false positives on informational queries.


additional_block_words:
# Transfer actions
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion ..._hooks/litellm_content_filter/policy_templates/sg_pdpa_profiling_automated_decisions.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ always_block_keywords:
exceptions:
- "human in the loop"
- "human review"
- "human oversight"
- "with human oversight"
Copy link
Contributor

@greptile-apps greptile-apps bot Feb 24, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Narrowed exception may miss valid phrasing

Changing from "human oversight" to "with human oversight" correctly prevents the exception from unintentionally matching the block word "without human oversight" (since exceptions use substring matching). However, this also means phrases like "ensure human oversight is maintained" or "human oversight required" will no longer trigger the exception.

Consider additionally listing other common phrasings that convey the same intent, such as:

  • "human oversight required"
  • "ensure human oversight"
  • "under human oversight"

Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!

- "appeals process"
- "explainability"
- "fairness audit"
Expand Down
Loading