Hacktoberfest 2026: the issues maintainers tagged for October, open and beginner-friendly. Browse Hacktoberfest issues

A cross-field `@@validate` rule is skipped on a partial `update()` — the ABSENT operand makes the comparison pass

Open
  • Is something wrong?
#2,833 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Maintainers usually reply within 1 day

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
3/5
Estimated time
1-2 days
Newbie friendliness
65/100
Issue type
Bug
Clarity
Clearly specified
Activity status
Active
Tech stack
typescript
Domain
backend

Research direction

The update validator is built at packages/orm/src/client/zod/factory.ts:2094-2097, where addCustomValidation is called without the present-field set; the comparison semantics are in packages/zod/src/utils.ts:429-437 (ABSENT sentinel) and :463-472 (evalBinary returns true on ABSENT). Read both sites and the create() path to see how present fields are supplied there, then choose between merging omitted row fields into the payload or rejecting an ABSENT comparison. Done when a model with @@validate(endDate > startDate) throws on update({ data: { endDate: earlier-than-startDate } }).

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

Hi,

I run independent, pre-registered verification of AI-built software (Trenyx; the published engagements are at https://trenyx.io/audits.html) and did a static-only read of zenstackhq/zenstack at commit 3f1ed725, the plan hashed and anchored before reading. The access-control side held everywhere I pushed on it, and I want that on the record first: policies are injected at one query-executor choke point regardless of the ORM call shape (nested writes, createMany/updateMany/upsert, connect, polymorphic base/sub joins all reduce to the same enforcement), the RPC and REST adapters take the auth context only from the server-side getter, and every user-supplied key is gated by z.strictObject before a Kysely node exists (packages/orm/src/client/zod/factory.ts:500 makeWhereSchema, one of 63 strictObject sites). Nothing here is a security report. This is one correctness seam in validation.

The gap: a model-level @@validate rule that references two or more fields is silently skipped on update() when the payload omits one of them.

  • packages/orm/src/client/zod/factory.ts:2094-2097 builds the update validator by calling ZodUtils.addCustomValidation without the present-field set, so the evaluator has no way to know which referenced fields are absent from the payload versus absent from the row.
  • packages/zod/src/utils.ts:429-437 defines the ABSENT sentinel and :463-472 (evalBinary) returns true for any comparison in which an operand is ABSENT. A rule like endDate > startDate therefore passes whenever the update touches only one of the two fields.
  • The consequence is that a partial update is never checked against the row's true post-update state: an update({ data: { endDate } }) that makes endDate earlier than the stored startDate is accepted, while the same pair supplied together in create() is rejected. The validation attributes on single fields (@length, @email, @regex) are unaffected; this is specifically the cross-field case.

Suggested direction: on update(), either load the referenced fields that the payload omits and evaluate the rule on the merged value, or treat an ABSENT operand in a comparison as "cannot evaluate" and reject rather than pass, at least for rules that reference more than one field. One test would fence it: a model with @@validate(endDate > startDate), a row created with a valid pair, then update({ data: { endDate: <earlier than startDate> } }) expected to throw.

Happy to re-check whatever you ship. The pre-registration hash and the full record publish with the write-up, and if you ship a fix the write-up says so.

SK
Trenyx

Dominant language
TypeScript
Stars
2.9k
Forks
157
Avg merge
11h 42m
Merged PRs (30d)
20

Getting set up

This project ships no dev container, Dockerfile or contributing guide, so setting up is up to you: start from its README, and see our first-contribution guide for the general steps.

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from zenstackhq/zenstack

All issues in zenstackhq/zenstack

Similar issues

More TypeScript issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.