Verification Result
BLOCKED
RISK: HIGH
Policy Violations:
Safe Alternative: Loading...
The written default request asks to cancel a reservation, while allowed actions list view schedule and cancel own reservation. Its acting and target user identifiers also differ under strict ownership. The source evaluator therefore produces two violations. A request with an allowed action and identical user identifiers produces none. At one hundred pixels per violation the bars span two hundred and zero. The original offline Cytoscape failure happens while loading the preset and prevents later button bindings. We preserve that original behavior and explain source conditions, without claiming a live authorization gateway or successful verification. A request can fail just the action check or both action and ownership checks. At one hundred pixels per failed test the bars span one hundred and two hundred, yet either case sets the same blocked status and high risk label. If there are zero violations the source returns allowed and low. This is a binary local rule, not a quantified risk model or a demonstrated interception of real tool execution. Its policy-violation message says identity mismatch whenever any violation exists, even if users match and only the action fails. Inspect exact conditions rather than treating a generic explanation as causal evidence. The example policy includes require explicit consent and the request includes an authorization token. But evaluatePolicy never reads either field. At one hundred twenty pixels per counted declared flag or implemented consent check the consent-flag bar spans one hundred twenty and the actual check bar remains zero. Matching user strings is not identity verification, and a token label is not credential validation. An allowed action with strict ownership disabled can pass the written two-test evaluator even without authenticated delegation or consent. No account mutation, third-party authorization, or real security enforcement is demonstrated by these source labels.