Files
music_library/backlog/docs/doc-2 - Prevent-pi-from-accessing-sensitive-files.md
2026-05-04 21:22:27 +01:00

220 lines
8.6 KiB
Markdown

---
id: doc-2
title: Prevent pi from accessing sensitive files
type: other
created_date: "2026-05-03 13:32"
updated_date: "2026-05-04 06:55"
---
# Implementation Analysis: Prevent pi from accessing sensitive files
## Summary
The task requires a **declarative** way to intercept pi tool calls that would access sensitive files (e.g., `.env`, secrets, credentials, API keys). Pi's extension system provides the `tool_call` event hook, which fires **before** any tool executes and supports blocking.
## Sensitive File Categories (for this project)
| Category | Patterns | Examples |
| ----------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------ |
| Environment secrets | `.env`, `.env.*`, `.envrc` | `.env`, `.env.production` |
| Key files | `*.pem`, `*.key`, `*.key.pub` | SSH keys |
| Secret/credential files | `*secret*`, `*credential*`, `*credentials*` | `secrets.yml`, `credentials.json` |
| Config dirs | `.ssh/`, `.aws/`, `.gnupg/` | SSH config, AWS credentials |
| Production config | Any path known to contain secrets | `rel/`, production env vars |
| Pi session files | `~/.pi/agent/sessions/` | Session JSONL files (contain tool outputs) |
## Available Pi Extension Mechanisms
### `tool_call` event (primary approach)
The `tool_call` event fires after `tool_execution_start` and **before** the tool executes. It can block execution:
```typescript
pi.on("tool_call", async (event, ctx) => {
if (event.toolName === "read" && isSensitivePath(event.input.path)) {
return { block: true, reason: "Sensitive file blocked" };
}
});
```
**Key capabilities:**
- `event.toolName` — identifies the tool (`read`, `bash`, `grep`, `find`, `ls`, `write`, `edit`)
- `event.input` — tool parameters (mutable, can be patched)
- `isToolCallEventType("read", event)` — type-narrows for specific tools
- Return `{ block: true, reason: "..." }` to prevent execution
- `ctx.hasUI` — check if interactive (for notifications)
- `ctx.ui.notify(...)` — show warning in UI
### Tools that can access sensitive files
| Tool | Danger | Input fields to check |
| ------- | ---------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------- |
| `read` | **High** — reads file content into LLM context | `input.path` |
| `bash` | **High** — can `cat`, `grep`, `curl` any file | `input.command` (regex match) |
| `grep` | **High** — searches file contents | `input.path` |
| `find` | **Low** — lists filenames only | `input.path` (directory listing) |
| `ls` | **Low** — lists directory contents | `input.path` |
| `write` | **Medium** — could overwrite sensitive files | `input.path` |
| `edit` | **Medium** — could modify sensitive files | `input.path` |
### `tool_result` event (secondary approach)
Fires **after** execution. Can modify results but NOT block. Useful for sanitization, but harder to get right:
```typescript
pi.on("tool_result", async (event, ctx) => {
// Modify event.content or event.details
return { content: [...], details: {...} };
});
```
### Full tool override (heavyweight approach)
Register a replacement for `read`/`bash` with the same name. Requires reimplementing built-in functionality:
```typescript
pi.registerTool({
name: "read",
// ... must implement full read logic
});
```
## Implementation Routes
### Route A: `tool_call` event interception (RECOMMENDED)
**Description:** Single extension listening on `tool_call`, checking paths/commands against a configuration file of protected patterns. Blocks matching calls.
**Implementation:**
1. Create `.pi/extensions/sensitive-file-guard.ts` (or `index.ts` in a directory)
2. Create `.pi/sensitive-paths.json` — declarative config listing protected patterns
3. In `tool_call` handler:
- For `read`, `grep`, `write`, `edit`: check `input.path` against patterns
- For `bash`: regex-scan `input.command` for sensitive paths
- For `find`, `ls`: check directory paths
- Block if match, notify in UI
**Sample config file (`.pi/sensitive-paths.json`):**
```json
{
"blocked_paths": [
".env",
".env.*",
"*.pem",
"*.key",
"*secret*",
"*credential*",
"*credentials*",
".ssh/",
".aws/",
".gnupg/",
"config/*.secret.exs"
],
"blocked_commands": ["cat .env", "cat ~/.ssh", "printenv", "cat ~/.aws"]
}
```
**Pros:**
- Minimal code (~60 lines of TypeScript)
- Declarative configuration file (easy to audit and update)
- Works with ALL tools (read, bash, grep, find, ls, write, edit)
- No reimplementation of built-in tools
- Inherits built-in rendering (syntax highlighting, diffs, etc.)
- Easy to extend with new patterns
- Fails safe (blocks before any file access)
**Cons:**
- Can't sanitize partial output (but blocking prevents all access)
- Regex-based command scanning for bash has edge cases
- `find`/`ls` only blocked at directory level, not per-file
**Code size estimate:** ~80 lines TypeScript + ~20 lines JSON config
---
### Route B: Full tool override (read + bash)
**Description:** Override the `read` and `bash` tools with custom implementations that include path checking. Delegates to original implementation for allowed paths.
**Implementation:**
1. Create `.pi/extensions/sensitive-file-guard/` directory
2. Override `read` tool: check paths, delegate allowed reads to original implementation
3. Override `bash` tool: scan commands, delegate allowed commands to original implementation
4. Optionally override `grep`, `find`, `ls`, `write`, `edit`
**Pros:**
- Full control (can log, can sanitize output, can modify behavior)
- No event overhead per tool call
- Can add audit logging
**Cons:**
- Must reimplement or re-wrap built-in tool logic (~200+ lines)
- Must maintain compatibility with pi updates
- More complex testing
- Risk of subtle behavior differences vs built-in
- Lose or must reimplement built-in rendering
**Code size estimate:** ~300+ lines TypeScript
---
### Route C: Hybrid — `tool_call` + `tool_result` + config file
**Description:** Route A plus `tool_result` sanitization for cases where partial access is allowed.
**Implementation:**
Same as Route A, plus a `tool_result` handler that scans output for sensitive patterns and redacts them.
**Pros:**
- Most comprehensive protection
- Can allow partial access with sanitization
**Cons:**
- Most complex
- `tool_result` sanitization is error-prone (false positives/negatives)
- Redacted content still consumes context tokens
- Hard to get right for all output formats
**Code size estimate:** ~150 lines TypeScript
---
## Recommendation: Route A
Route A (pure `tool_call` event interception with declarative config) is the **simplest viable approach** that meets all requirements:
1. **Declarative** ✓ — JSON config file lists protected patterns
2. **Comprehensive** ✓ — Covers all tools that can access files
3. **Simple** ✓ — ~80 lines of code, easy to review and maintain
4. **Safe** ✓ — Blocks BEFORE any file access, cannot fail open
5. **Minimal** ✓ — No reimplementation needed, no dependency on pi internals
## Architectural Impact
| Touchpoint | Impact |
| -------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------- |
| `.pi/extensions/` | New extension file added |
| `.pi/sensitive-paths.json` | New config file (declarative rules) |
| `tool_call` event | New subscriber, no breaking changes |
| Built-in tools | Unchanged (event interception is non-invasive) |
| `ctx.ui` | Used for notification only (no blocking dependency) |
| Other extensions | Compatible — tool_call handlers chain in load order |
## Open Questions
1. **Config format:** JSON vs YAML? JSON is simpler (no dependencies), YAML is more readable.
2. **Per-project vs global:** Should this be project-local (`.pi/`) or global (`~/.pi/agent/`)?
3. **Command scanning depth:** For bash, how aggressively should we scan? Regex on the command string has edge cases (e.g., `cat $HOME/.env`).
4. **Logging:** Should blocked attempts be logged for audit?
5. **Non-interactive mode:** Should sensitive access be blocked silently or with error in print/JSON modes?