Skip to content

fix: treat unreadable Blizzard profiles as ordinary - #32

Merged
Erilla merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/fingerprint-sweep-skips-missing-profiles
Aug 10, 2026
Merged

fix: treat unreadable Blizzard profiles as ordinary#32
Erilla merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/fingerprint-sweep-skips-missing-profiles

Conversation

@Erilla

@Erilla Erilla commented Aug 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

A 404 from Blizzard's Profile API was reaching the sweep's outer catch and becoming failure / upstream_unavailable / retryable, so the run discarded its Raider.IO result, published nothing, and retried from the root.

The live measurement in Measure sweep reach and cost against SlashWho's corpus recorded 23 of 393 candidates returning 404. A single one is enough to abandon a sweep, so no real sweep would ever have published. Nothing caught it because the one live search so far was stopped earlier by the privacy gate.

  • A candidate with no readable achievements profile is skipped, keeping the request it already spent against the cap.
  • A root whose roster or own achievements 404 reports an empty sweep, so its Raider.IO snapshot publishes instead of stranding the run.
  • Unguilded roots already returned an empty roster (client.ts:272) and are unaffected.

Three domain tests, each failing before the change.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qh8Zb2HnaxebWrRLUMoAiv

A 404 from the Profile API turned the whole sweep into a retryable
upstream failure, so it published nothing and retried from the root.
The live measurement saw 23 of 393 candidates 404, which means in
practice no real sweep would ever have published.

Skip such a candidate and keep the request it already spent. For the
root's own roster or achievements, report an empty sweep instead: the
root cannot be fingerprinted at all, so its Raider.IO snapshot should
publish rather than the run being stranded on a retry that cannot
succeed. Unguilded roots already return an empty roster and are
unaffected.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qh8Zb2HnaxebWrRLUMoAiv
@Erilla
Erilla merged commit 223f5b0 into main Aug 10, 2026
2 checks passed
@Erilla
Erilla deleted the fix/fingerprint-sweep-skips-missing-profiles branch August 10, 2026 17:02
Erilla added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 10, 2026
Replaces #33, which was left conflicting after #32 squash-merged. Same
single commit, rebased onto `main`.

The sweep gated both its root and every candidate on `ownerId === null`
— Raider.IO ownership not being publicly linked. That one condition
covers two unrelated states:

| State | `characterDetails.user` | Was it excluded? |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Player withheld the ownership link | `null` | yes |
| Character never claimed on Raider.IO | `null` | yes |

Sampling arbitrary characters found the second state is the ordinary
one, and it is exactly the population the fingerprint exists to reach —
bank alts and levelling alts are the least likely characters to be
claimed upstream. Both gates are removed.

**This reverses a closed decision.** [Privacy stance on defeating hidden
ownership](#8) resolved that
privacy-hidden ownership excludes fingerprint-derived linkage, and
[Data-protection exposure for publishing derived account
linkage](#16) named not
publishing inferred-only linkage where a contrary preference was
signalled as one of the two mitigations that materially move the UK GDPR
balancing and necessity tests. A fingerprint-derived link may now
connect characters whose Raider.IO ownership is not public. Maintainer's
decision; recorded on both issues and on the map.

Also in scope, because the candidate gate was where it lived: each
candidate cost one live `getCharacter` call to Raider.IO — hundreds per
sweep, counted against neither the discovery request cap nor the
Blizzard hourly budget. Removing the gate removes the call, and a test
now pins it.

- `/privacy` no longer promises an exclusion the code does not make, and
points at removal requests as the only route.
- The design spec carries a dated amendment; `CONTEXT.md` redefines
*privacy-hidden ownership*.
- Suppression checks, including the recheck immediately before
admission, are untouched.

Both new handler tests were confirmed red against the previous code.

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qh8Zb2HnaxebWrRLUMoAiv

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

1 participant