BE-773: Drop the nil-UUID sentinel from the created-by filter

[TimDiekmann]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

The property-protection filter compiled a request without an actor to a nil-UUID parameter, the last place in the query layer that read the nil UUID as the public actor. The comparison now says what it means: nothing equals an actor that is not there.

🔗 Related links

• BE-773 (internal)

🚫 Blocked by

• BE-772: Require the actor when building policy components #9279

🔍 What does this change?

• FilterExpression::from_cell_filter_expression returns [None] for the actor expression when the request carries no actor, instead of substituting the nil UUID
• Filter::for_property_filter decides per comparison what a missing actor means: an equality matches no record, an inequality matches every record, and an IN matches no record
• Covers the actor-present branch, which had no test

Behaviour is unchanged: an empty All transpiles to TRUE and an empty Any to FALSE, which is what uuid != nil and uuid = nil evaluated to for every real row.

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

• does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

• are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

• do not affect the execution graph

⚠️ Known issues

• The remaining Uuid::nil() uses in entity/table.rs are cursor and fixture values in tests, not actor sentinels, so they stay.

🐾 Next steps

• BE-758: rate limiting, ahead of the versioned public API surface

🛡 What tests cover this?

• The property-protection transform cases, whose fixtures now pin the anonymous case as a tautology rather than a nil comparison
• A new case pinning that a request with an actor compares against that actor's UUID

❓ How to test this?

1. cargo nextest run --package hash-graph-store --all-features
2. cargo clippy --all-features --package hash-graph-store --all-targets

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 25, 2026 4:55pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 25, 2026 4:55pm
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Aug 25, 2026 4:55pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Aug 25, 2026 4:55pm

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 82.60870% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 60.35%. Comparing base (99fcc04) to head (5079507).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
libs/@local/graph/store/src/filter/mod.rs	65.21%	7 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                    Coverage Diff                                     @@
##           t/be-772-require-the-actor-when-building-policycomponents    #9281   +/-   ##
==========================================================================================
  Coverage                                                      60.35%   60.35%           
==========================================================================================
  Files                                                           1430     1430           
  Lines                                                         140942   140957   +15     
  Branches                                                        6613     6613           
==========================================================================================
+ Hits                                                           85063    85074   +11     
- Misses                                                         54800    54803    +3     
- Partials                                                        1079     1080    +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	14.68% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	3.27% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	10.02% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	12.22% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api	16.94% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authentication	96.09% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	29.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	46.84% <82.60%> (+0.07%)	⬆️
rust.hash-graph-validation	84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	79.82% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[TimDiekmann]

What was the reason for uuid_not_actor? Was it to just have the parameter filled in all types of queries?

Kind-of, yes. It previously generated a filter if the creator of a type was not the current actor, which does not make sense to have for the nil sentinel as no public user was ever able to create something in the DB in the first place. With the Filter now being compiled conditionally, the weird test-helper is not needed anymore.

[thehabbos007]

I'll look towards the root of the stack now, but this one was short and easy to review,, thanks!

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$28.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 227 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.179 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.64 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.39 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$13.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 95.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.501 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$45.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 392 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.228 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 157 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$25.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 231 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.630 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 246 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.753 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.418 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 133 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.034 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.84 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.827 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.275 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.638 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.357 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.114 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.176 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.324 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.789 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.12 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-5.927 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.75 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.895 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.69 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.355 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.176 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.78 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.756 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.11 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.869 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.224 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.03 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.218 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.550 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.408 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.261 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.064 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.178 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.128 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$43.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 319 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.323 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 229 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.890 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$36.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 235 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.674 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$32.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 261 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.163 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$43.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 276 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.408 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$50.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 361 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.004 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$41.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 253 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.785 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$95.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 602 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.89 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$34.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 270 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.829 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$284 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.26 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}2.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.97 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 99.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.53 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.26 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$10.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.432 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.247 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.812 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.382 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.546 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 84.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.097 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.614 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 67.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.29 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 103 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.252 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.862 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$11.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 118 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.330 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 79.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.021 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 111 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.418 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 46.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.118 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$60.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 433 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$115 \mathrm{ms} \pm 688 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$68.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 666 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$77.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 481 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.58 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$87.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 597 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$93.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 546 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.66 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 322 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$73.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 477 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$51.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 296 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$62.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 392 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.37 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 414 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.00 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 428 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$128 \mathrm{ms} \pm 820 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$139 \mathrm{ms} \pm 681 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$19.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 157 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$547 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.72 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}1.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph