mirror of
https://github.com/luxfi/aml.git
synced 2026-09-24 00:25:20 +00:00
zeekayandHanzo Dev
039fa7e3d6
The previous evaluator registered a stub for every term the language offered. Absent a real implementation, sanctions screening answered false, geographic matching answered true, the local hour answered noon, travel-rule completeness answered complete, and chain risk answered zero. Six of the terms were later replaced by store-backed versions; eleven never were, which left thirteen of the twenty-three shipped rules structurally unable to fire. Measured on the shipped code: a 50,000 dollar crypto payment at 3 a.m. from a politically exposed customer in a listed jurisdiction, to a fresh address, naming a designated person, raised four alerts out of twenty-three. There are now no stubs. Terms are methods on the evaluation scope, each term is mapped to the provider that answers it, and a rule naming a term whose provider is absent is refused when the rule set is installed. The refusal names the term. A rule set containing one such rule installs nothing, because a partially installed set is a control surface nobody can describe. Rules must yield a boolean. The previous evaluator accepted a number and read it as truthy, so a velocity rule written as a bare sum fired on any activity at all. Evidence failures at evaluation time — an unknown currency, an absent subject, an unreachable store — are recorded on the alert and routed to review rather than cleared, so an outage cannot become an approval. Windows are fetched once per subject and lookback for the whole rule set rather than once per rule. Aggregation is over the transaction's own timestamp, not the row's insertion time, and history queries are parameterised and scoped to the tenant. The previous store interpolated the customer identifier into the filter string and filtered by neither organisation nor transaction time. Co-authored-by: Hanzo Dev <[email protected]>