feat(compliance-check): unlock all 1874 MCs + close gap-table items

User: 'wir haben 1800 MCs erstellt um sie zu 10% zu nutzen — das ist
Schwachsinn'. Fixed all 6 gaps from the audit.

#1 max_controls=0 (was 20):
- agent_compliance_check_routes _check_single: passes max_controls=0 to
  check_document_with_controls -> ALL MCs evaluated per doc_type.
- 8 doc_types now use 1874 MCs instead of 160 (10x coverage).
- Regex matching is cheap (<1s per doc); LLM-enrich cap of 10 stays.

#2 LLM-verify fixed:
- llm_verify.py was getting 0/N parsed. Causes: qwen3 thinking-mode
  wrapped output in <think>...</think>, /api/generate doesn't enforce
  JSON, prompt didn't handle code-fence wrappers.
- Now uses /api/chat with format='json' (forces valid JSON).
- _parse_batch_response strips <think> tags, accepts {results:[...]}
  AND bare [...], adds richer regex-fallback parse, logs raw head on
  total parse failure for diagnosis.

#3 Loeschkonzept checklist (new):
- doc_checks/loeschkonzept_checks.py — 9 L1 + 7 L2 checks per DIN 66398
  + Art. 5(1)(e)/17/32 DSGVO: scope+responsibility, data categories,
  retention periods, legal basis refs (HGB/AO/BGB), deletion trigger,
  deletion process+technical+systems, deletion proof, exceptions +
  Art. 18 lock, review cycle, DSGVO references.
- runner.py registered for loeschkonzept/loeschung/loeschfristen.

#4 regulation backfill script:
- backend-compliance/scripts/backfill_mc_regulation.py — regex-detects
  DSGVO/TDDDG/TMG/BGB/HGB/AO/MStV/UWG/VSBG/PAngV/GwG/BDSG/EU-VO
  references in MC title+question+pass_criteria, UPDATEs regulation +
  article fields.
- Idempotent (only NULL rows), --dry-run flag, batched 200/UPDATE.
- Run inside container: docker exec bp-compliance-backend python3 \
    /app/scripts/backfill_mc_regulation.py

#5 MC alias-fallback:
- rag_document_checker._MC_ALIAS_FALLBACK maps doc_types without own
  MCs to a related set: nutzungsbedingungen->agb, social_media->dse,
  sub_processor/scc/tom_annex->avv, loeschfristen->loeschkonzept,
  eu_institution/dsb->dse.
- _load_controls retries with the alias when the primary query
  returns 0 rows.
- 14 additional doc_types now get MC coverage transparently.

#6 cross-domain auto-discovery:
- _autodiscover_missing builds a crawl plan: primary submitted base
  + up to 2 related domains sharing the owner SLD (e.g. BMW Group:
  bmw.de + bmwgroup.com + bmwgroup.jobs).
- Detection: regex over submitted texts for https?://...<owner>...
  hostnames distinct from the primary base.
- Each crawled base contributes documents + cmp_payloads to the
  discovery pool.

Net effect for BMW: 1874 MCs evaluated (90 from cookie alone, was
20), Loeschkonzept Pflichtangaben benoten-bar, LLM overturns false
regex FAILs, Joint-Controller policies on bmwgroup.jobs (Social
Media) jetzt entdeckbar. Same wins will apply to CRA-Compliance check.
This commit is contained in:
Benjamin Admin
2026-05-17 13:07:50 +02:00
parent fab1e35847
commit 8a44e67293
6 changed files with 565 additions and 70 deletions
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ GET /compliance/agent/compliance-check/{check_id} — poll status
import asyncio
import logging
import os
import re
import uuid as _uuid
from dataclasses import asdict
from datetime import datetime, timezone
@@ -600,32 +601,65 @@ async def _autodiscover_missing(
})
return
base = max(bases, key=bases.get) + "/"
# Build crawl plan: primary base + any related domains mentioned in
# the submitted texts that share the owner's SLD. Example: BMW Group
# text mentions bmwgroup.com and bmwgroup.jobs in addition to bmw.de.
primary_base = max(bases, key=bases.get) + "/"
crawl_bases: list[str] = [primary_base]
primary_netloc = urlparse(primary_base).netloc.lower().lstrip("www.")
owner_token = primary_netloc.split(".")[0] # 'bmw'
if owner_token and len(owner_token) >= 3:
domain_re = re.compile(
r"https?://([a-z0-9][a-z0-9\-]*\.)*" + re.escape(owner_token)
+ r"[a-z0-9\-]*\.[a-z]{2,}",
re.IGNORECASE,
)
seen_bases = {primary_base}
for entry in doc_entries:
text = entry.get("text") or ""
for m in domain_re.finditer(text):
p = urlparse(m.group(0))
base = f"{p.scheme}://{p.netloc}/"
base_netloc = p.netloc.lower().lstrip("www.")
if base_netloc == primary_netloc:
continue
if base in seen_bases:
continue
seen_bases.add(base)
crawl_bases.append(base)
if len(crawl_bases) >= 3:
break
if len(crawl_bases) >= 3:
break
_update(
check_id,
f"Suche fehlende Dokumente auf {urlparse(base).netloc}...",
f"Suche fehlende Dokumente auf {', '.join(urlparse(b).netloc for b in crawl_bases)}...",
18,
)
try:
async with httpx.AsyncClient(timeout=180.0) as client:
resp = await client.post(
f"{CONSENT_TESTER_URL}/dsi-discovery",
json={"url": base, "max_documents": 15},
timeout=180.0,
)
if resp.status_code != 200:
logger.warning("auto-discovery: HTTP %d for %s", resp.status_code, base)
discovered: list[dict] = []
disc_payloads: list[dict] = []
else:
disc_body = resp.json()
discovered = disc_body.get("documents", [])
disc_payloads = disc_body.get("cmp_payloads") or []
except Exception as e:
logger.warning("auto-discovery failed for %s: %s", base, e)
discovered = []
disc_payloads = []
discovered: list[dict] = []
disc_payloads: list[dict] = []
for base in crawl_bases:
try:
async with httpx.AsyncClient(timeout=180.0) as client:
resp = await client.post(
f"{CONSENT_TESTER_URL}/dsi-discovery",
json={"url": base, "max_documents": 15},
timeout=180.0,
)
if resp.status_code != 200:
logger.warning("auto-discovery: HTTP %d for %s",
resp.status_code, base)
continue
body = resp.json()
discovered.extend(body.get("documents", []) or [])
disc_payloads.extend(body.get("cmp_payloads") or [])
logger.info("auto-discovery on %s: %d docs",
base, len(body.get("documents", []) or []))
except Exception as e:
logger.warning("auto-discovery failed for %s: %s", base, e)
# Classify each discovered doc into a canonical doc_type
by_type: dict[str, dict] = {}
@@ -736,8 +770,12 @@ async def _check_single(
# Master Control checks (top 20 by severity to avoid noise)
try:
# max_controls=0 -> evaluate ALL MCs for this doc_type (DB has
# 1874 across 8 types; regex matching is cheap and dominates
# well under 1s per doc). Caps remain on the LLM-enrich step
# (top-10 FAILs) so cost stays bounded.
mc_results = await check_document_with_controls(
text, doc_type, label, max_controls=20, use_agent=use_agent,
text, doc_type, label, max_controls=0, use_agent=use_agent,
)
if mc_results:
for mc in mc_results:
@@ -62,7 +62,13 @@ async def verify_failed_checks(
async def _ask_llm_batch(
text: str, checks: list[dict], doc_title: str,
) -> dict[str, dict]:
"""Ask the LLM to verify ALL failed checks in a single call."""
"""Ask the LLM to verify ALL failed checks in a single call.
Uses /api/chat with format='json' so Ollama enforces a valid JSON
response object — much more reliable than the previous /api/generate
+ free-text approach which qwen3 often wrapped in <think>...</think>
reasoning tokens.
"""
checklist_lines = []
for i, c in enumerate(checks, 1):
checklist_lines.append(
@@ -70,69 +76,113 @@ async def _ask_llm_batch(
)
checklist_str = "\n".join(checklist_lines)
prompt = f"""/no_think
Pruefe ob der Dokumenttext die folgenden Anforderungen erfuellt.
DOKUMENT: "{doc_title}"
system_msg = (
"Du pruefst ob ein Dokument bestimmte Pflichtangaben enthaelt. "
"Antworte AUSSCHLIESSLICH mit einem JSON-Objekt: "
'{"results": [{"id": "<check-id>", "found": true|false, '
'"evidence": "<kurzes Zitat oder leer>"}]}. '
"Keine Erklaerungen, keine Reasoning-Tags, kein Markdown."
)
user_msg = (
f'DOKUMENT: "{doc_title}"\n\n'
f"ANFORDERUNGEN:\n{checklist_str}\n\n"
f"TEXT:\n{text}"
)
ANFORDERUNGEN:
{checklist_str}
payload = {
"model": OLLAMA_MODEL,
"messages": [
{"role": "system", "content": system_msg},
{"role": "user", "content": user_msg},
],
"stream": False,
"format": "json", # forces valid JSON output
"options": {"temperature": 0.0, "num_predict": 3000},
}
TEXT:
{text}
Antworte NUR mit einem JSON-Array (keine Erklaerung). Fuer jede Anforderung:
[{{"id": "check-id", "found": true/false, "evidence": "Kurzes Zitat (max 80 Zeichen) oder leer"}}]
"""
async with httpx.AsyncClient(timeout=90.0) as client:
resp = await client.post(
f"{OLLAMA_URL}/api/generate",
json={
"model": OLLAMA_MODEL,
"prompt": prompt,
"stream": False,
"options": {"temperature": 0.0, "num_predict": 2000},
},
)
async with httpx.AsyncClient(timeout=120.0) as client:
resp = await client.post(f"{OLLAMA_URL}/api/chat", json=payload)
resp.raise_for_status()
raw = resp.json().get("response", "")
data = resp.json()
raw = (data.get("message") or {}).get("content", "")
return _parse_batch_response(raw, checks)
def _parse_batch_response(raw: str, checks: list[dict]) -> dict[str, dict]:
"""Parse batch LLM JSON array response."""
"""Parse batch LLM response. Tolerates <think>…</think> wrappers,
code-fences, and either {results: [...]} or top-level [...]."""
import json
import re
results: dict[str, dict] = {}
raw = raw.strip()
if not raw:
logger.info("LLM batch: empty response from model")
return results
# Extract JSON array from markdown code blocks
m = re.search(r"```(?:json)?\s*(\[.*?\])\s*```", raw, re.DOTALL)
text = raw.strip()
# Strip qwen3 thinking tags
text = re.sub(r"<think>.*?</think>", "", text, flags=re.DOTALL).strip()
# Strip markdown code fences
m = re.search(r"```(?:json)?\s*(.+?)\s*```", text, re.DOTALL)
if m:
raw = m.group(1)
else:
m = re.search(r"\[.*\]", raw, re.DOTALL)
if m:
raw = m.group(0)
text = m.group(1).strip()
# Try parse as-is
parsed = None
try:
items = json.loads(raw)
if isinstance(items, list):
for item in items:
cid = item.get("id", "")
if cid:
results[cid] = {
"found": bool(item.get("found", False)),
"evidence": str(item.get("evidence", ""))[:150],
}
parsed = json.loads(text)
except (json.JSONDecodeError, ValueError):
# Fallback: extract individual JSON objects
for m in re.finditer(r'\{[^}]*"id"\s*:\s*"([^"]+)"[^}]*"found"\s*:\s*(true|false)[^}]*\}', raw, re.DOTALL):
cid = m.group(1)
found = m.group(2) == "true"
results[cid] = {"found": found, "evidence": ""}
# Try finding the first JSON object or array in the text
for pattern in (r"\{.*\}", r"\[.*\]"):
mm = re.search(pattern, text, re.DOTALL)
if mm:
try:
parsed = json.loads(mm.group(0))
break
except (json.JSONDecodeError, ValueError):
continue
if parsed is None:
logger.info(
"LLM batch: 0/%d checks parsed (raw head: %r)",
len(checks), raw[:120],
)
return results
# Accept both {"results": [...]} (preferred) and bare list
items = None
if isinstance(parsed, dict):
for key in ("results", "checks", "items", "verifications"):
if isinstance(parsed.get(key), list):
items = parsed[key]
break
elif isinstance(parsed, list):
items = parsed
if not items:
# Final fallback: regex over individual id/found pairs
for mm in re.finditer(
r'\{[^}]*"id"\s*:\s*"([^"]+)"[^}]*"found"\s*:\s*(true|false)[^}]*\}',
raw, re.DOTALL,
):
results[mm.group(1)] = {
"found": mm.group(2) == "true", "evidence": "",
}
logger.info("LLM batch: %d/%d checks parsed (regex fallback)",
len(results), len(checks))
return results
for item in items:
if not isinstance(item, dict):
continue
cid = item.get("id", "")
if not cid:
continue
results[cid] = {
"found": bool(item.get("found", False)),
"evidence": str(item.get("evidence", ""))[:150],
}
logger.info("LLM batch: %d/%d checks parsed", len(results), len(checks))
return results
@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
"""
Loeschkonzept checks — Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO ('Speicherbegrenzung'),
DIN 66398 (Leitlinie zur Entwicklung eines Loeschkonzepts).
L1: Pflichtangabe vorhanden?
L2: Pflichtangabe vollstaendig/korrekt?
"""
LOESCHKONZEPT_CHECKLIST = [
# ── L1: Geltungsbereich + Verantwortliche ─────────────────────────
{
"id": "scope_responsibility",
"label": "Geltungsbereich + Verantwortliche benannt",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"(?:geltungsbereich|anwendungsbereich)",
r"verantwortlich\w*\s+(?:fuer|für)\s+(?:das\s+)?l(?:oe|ö)schkonzept",
r"(?:datenschutzbeauftragt\w*|dpo|dsb)\s+(?:verantwort|zustaendig|zuständig)",
],
"severity": "HIGH",
"hint": "DIN 66398 verlangt einen klaren Geltungsbereich (welche Systeme, Datenarten, Standorte) und die Benennung des Verantwortlichen fuer Erstellung + Wartung des Loeschkonzepts.",
},
# ── L1: Datenkategorien ───────────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "data_categories",
"label": "Datenkategorien / Datenarten dokumentiert",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"(?:daten[\-\s]?kategori|datenart)\w*",
r"(?:kunden|mitarbeiter|interessent|bewerber|lieferant)daten",
r"personenbezogene?\s+daten[\-\s]?(?:art|kategori|gruppe)",
],
"severity": "HIGH",
"hint": "Pro Datenkategorie (Kundenstammdaten, Vertragsdaten, Mitarbeiterdaten, Bewerber, Lieferantendaten, etc.) muss eine eigene Loeschfrist festgelegt werden.",
},
{
"id": "data_categories_specific",
"label": "Konkrete Datenarten benannt (>= 5)",
"level": 2, "parent": "data_categories",
"patterns": [
r"(?:stammdaten|kontaktdaten|vertragsdaten|abrechnungsdaten|"
r"protokoll\w+|log[\-\s]?daten|gesundheits|biometrische?|"
r"finanz|bewerbungsunterlagen|kreditdaten|tracking)",
],
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"hint": "Beispiele aus der Praxis: Stammdaten, Kontaktdaten, Vertragsdaten, Abrechnungsdaten, Bewerbungsunterlagen, Log-Daten, Tracking-Cookies. Jeweils mit eigener Frist.",
},
# ── L1: Loeschfristen ─────────────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "retention_periods",
"label": "Konkrete Loeschfristen festgelegt",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"l(?:oe|ö)schfrist",
r"aufbewahrungs(?:frist|dauer|pflicht)",
r"\d+\s*(?:jahr|monat|tag|woche)",
r"speicherdauer",
],
"severity": "HIGH",
"hint": "Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO + Art. 13(2)(a) DSGVO: Speicherdauer oder Kriterien fuer die Festlegung muessen pro Datenkategorie konkret benannt sein.",
},
{
"id": "legal_retention_basis",
"label": "Gesetzliche Aufbewahrungspflichten referenziert",
"level": 2, "parent": "retention_periods",
"patterns": [
r"§\s*257\s*hgb|§\s*147\s*ao|hgb\s+§\s*257|ao\s+§\s*147",
r"6\s+jahr\w*\s+\((?:hgb|handels)",
r"10\s+jahr\w*\s+\((?:ao|steuer)",
r"handelsrechtlich|steuerrechtlich",
r"§\s*195\s*bgb|verjaehrung\w*\s+\(bgb",
],
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"hint": "Standardfristen referenzieren: §257 HGB (6 Jahre Buchungsbelege), §147 AO (10 Jahre Steuerunterlagen), §195 BGB (3 Jahre Verjaehrung). Ohne Referenz wirken die Fristen willkuerlich.",
},
{
"id": "deletion_trigger",
"label": "Loeschtrigger / Loeschanlass dokumentiert",
"level": 2, "parent": "retention_periods",
"patterns": [
r"l(?:oe|ö)sch[\-\s]?(?:trigger|anlass|grund|kriteri)",
r"(?:nach|bei)\s+(?:vertragsende|kuendigung|kündigung|abschluss)",
r"zweckwegfall|zweck\s+entfaellt",
r"einwilligungswiderruf",
],
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"hint": "Pro Datenkategorie muss klar sein WANN die Frist beginnt: Vertragsende, Kuendigung, letzter Kontakt, Zweckwegfall, Einwilligungswiderruf. Nur 'X Jahre' ohne Startpunkt ist unscharf.",
},
# ── L1: Loeschprozess ─────────────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "deletion_process",
"label": "Loeschprozess beschrieben",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"l(?:oe|ö)sch(?:prozess|vorgang|verfahren|workflow|routine)",
r"(?:wie|wann)\s+(?:wird|werden)\s+(?:die\s+daten\s+)?gel(?:oe|ö)scht",
r"automatisierte?\s+l(?:oe|ö)schung",
],
"severity": "HIGH",
"hint": "Beschreiben wie Loeschung erfolgt: automatisch per Cron-Job, manuell durch Admin, Loeschungs-Workflow im CRM, Backup-Loeschung etc.",
},
{
"id": "deletion_technical",
"label": "Technische Loeschmethode benannt",
"level": 2, "parent": "deletion_process",
"patterns": [
r"(?:physisch\w*|sicher\w*)\s+l(?:oe|ö)schung",
r"(?:ueberschr|überschr)eiben\w*\s*(?:der|von)?\s*daten",
r"(?:dod[\-\s]?5220|nist[\-\s]?800|crypto[\-\s]?shredding)",
r"papierakten?\s*(?:vernicht|schreddern|verbrenn)",
r"datentraeger\w*\s+(?:zerstoer|vernicht|entmagnetis)",
],
"severity": "LOW",
"hint": "Technische Standards nennen: DoD 5220.22-M (mehrfaches Ueberschreiben), NIST 800-88, Crypto-Shredding (Verschluesselung + Schluesselvernichtung), Papier per DIN 66399.",
},
{
"id": "deletion_systems",
"label": "Loeschung in allen relevanten Systemen",
"level": 2, "parent": "deletion_process",
"patterns": [
r"backup\w*\s+(?:l(?:oe|ö)sch|umfass|einbezogen|loeschr|löschr)",
r"archive?\w*\s+(?:l(?:oe|ö)sch|enthalten|inbegriffen|umfass)",
r"(?:crm|erp|datenbank|datawarehouse|dwh)\w*\s+l(?:oe|ö)sch",
r"(?:alle|saemtliche|sämtliche)\s+systeme",
],
"severity": "LOW",
"hint": "Loeschung muss in ALLEN Systemen erfolgen: CRM, ERP, Backups, Archive, Data Warehouse, lokale Kopien. Backups die laenger als die Loeschfrist aufbewahrt werden sind kritisch (gerichtlich umstritten).",
},
# ── L1: Loeschnachweis ────────────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "deletion_proof",
"label": "Loeschnachweis / Loeschprotokoll",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"l(?:oe|ö)sch[\-\s]?(?:nachweis|protokoll|dokumentation|log)",
r"(?:protokoll|dokument)\w*\s+(?:der|alle)\s+l(?:oe|ö)schung",
r"audit[\-\s]?trail.*l(?:oe|ö)sch",
],
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"hint": "Art. 5(2) DSGVO (Rechenschaftspflicht): Loeschvorgaenge muessen nachweisbar sein. Mindestens: was, wann, durch wen, von wo. Ein Audit-Log oder Loeschprotokoll erfuellt das.",
},
# ── L1: Ausnahmen / Sperren ───────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "deletion_exceptions",
"label": "Ausnahmen + Sperrung statt Loeschung",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"(?:einschraenkung|einschränkung)\s+der\s+verarbeitung|art\.?\s*18",
r"sperr\w+\s+(?:statt|anstelle)\s+l(?:oe|ö)sch",
r"l(?:oe|ö)sch(?:beschr|sperr|ausnahme|hindernis)",
r"(?:rechtsstreit|gerichtsverfahren|prozessrelevant)",
],
"severity": "MEDIUM",
"hint": "Wenn Loeschung nicht moeglich ist (laufender Prozess, gesetzliche Aufbewahrung, Streitfall) muss stattdessen Sperrung/Einschraenkung (Art. 18 DSGVO) erfolgen. Sperrkonzept dokumentieren.",
},
# ── L1: Review-Zyklus ─────────────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "review_cycle",
"label": "Review-Zyklus / regelmaessige Pruefung",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"(?:jaehrlich|jährlich|halbjaehrlich|halbjährlich|vierteljaehrlich|vierteljährlich|quartalsweise)\s+(?:gepr|review|aktualis)",
r"review[\-\s]?(?:zyklus|intervall|frist)",
r"naechste|nächste\s+(?:ueberpr|überpr|review)",
r"(?:loeschkonzept|löschkonzept)\s+(?:wird|muss)\s+(?:regelmaessig|regelmäßig|jaehrlich|jährlich)",
],
"severity": "LOW",
"hint": "DIN 66398 + Praxis: Loeschkonzept jaehrlich (oder bei Systemaenderungen ausserplanmaessig) ueberpruefen. Frist explizit benennen ('jaehrlich') statt nur 'regelmaessig'.",
},
# ── L1: DSGVO-Verweise ────────────────────────────────────────────
{
"id": "gdpr_reference",
"label": "Rechtliche Grundlagen referenziert",
"level": 1, "parent": None,
"patterns": [
r"art\.?\s*5\s*(?:abs\.?\s*1\s*)?(?:lit\.?\s*)?e\s*dsgvo",
r"art\.?\s*17\s*dsgvo",
r"art\.?\s*32\s*dsgvo",
r"speicherbegrenzung",
],
"severity": "LOW",
"hint": "Direkte Norm-Referenzen erhoehen Beweiskraft: Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO (Speicherbegrenzung), Art. 17 (Recht auf Loeschung), Art. 32 (TOMs).",
},
]
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ from .avv_checks import AVV_CHECKLIST
from .scc_checks import SCC_CHECKLIST
from .tom_annex_checks import TOM_ANNEX_CHECKLIST
from .sub_processor_checks import SUB_PROCESSOR_LIST_CHECKLIST
from .loeschkonzept_checks import LOESCHKONZEPT_CHECKLIST
logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
@@ -52,6 +53,10 @@ _CHECKLIST_MAP = {
"sub_processor_list": (SUB_PROCESSOR_LIST_CHECKLIST, "Art. 28(3)(d) DSGVO"),
"sub_processor": (SUB_PROCESSOR_LIST_CHECKLIST, "Art. 28(3)(d) DSGVO"),
"unterauftragnehmer": (SUB_PROCESSOR_LIST_CHECKLIST, "Art. 28(3)(d) DSGVO"),
"loeschkonzept": (LOESCHKONZEPT_CHECKLIST, "Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO / DIN 66398"),
"loeschung": (LOESCHKONZEPT_CHECKLIST, "Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO / DIN 66398"),
"loeschfristen": (LOESCHKONZEPT_CHECKLIST, "Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO / DIN 66398"),
"deletion_concept": (LOESCHKONZEPT_CHECKLIST, "Art. 5(1)(e) DSGVO / DIN 66398"),
}
@@ -241,8 +241,35 @@ def _map_doc_type(doc_type: str) -> str:
return _DOC_TYPE_MAP.get(doc_type, doc_type)
# Doc-types that have no own MCs but can borrow from a related set.
# (DB currently covers: dse, cookie, loeschkonzept, widerruf, dsfa,
# avv, agb, impressum — total 1874 MCs across these.)
_MC_ALIAS_FALLBACK = {
"nutzungsbedingungen": "agb", # T&C overlap
"terms": "agb",
"terms_of_use": "agb",
"social_media": "dse", # Joint-controller / Art. 26 is in DSE area
"joint_controller": "dse",
"sub_processor": "avv", # Subprocessor list = AVV annex
"sub_processor_list": "avv",
"scc": "avv", # SCC = AVV-Vertragsklauseln
"standardvertragsklauseln": "avv",
"tom_annex": "avv", # TOM-Annex meist als AVV-Anlage
"tom": "avv",
"dpa": "avv",
"loeschung": "loeschkonzept",
"loeschfristen": "loeschkonzept",
"eu_institution": "dse", # EU institution = DSE under VO 2018/1725
"dsb": "dse", # DSB info ist Teil der DSE
}
async def _load_controls(doc_type: str, db_url: str, limit: int) -> list[dict]:
"""Load all doc_check_controls for a doc_type from PostgreSQL."""
"""Load all doc_check_controls for a doc_type from PostgreSQL.
Falls back via _MC_ALIAS_FALLBACK when no MCs exist for the requested
type (e.g. 'nutzungsbedingungen' -> 'agb').
"""
try:
import asyncpg
db = db_url or os.getenv(
@@ -264,6 +291,10 @@ async def _load_controls(doc_type: str, db_url: str, limit: int) -> list[dict]:
query += f" LIMIT {limit}"
rows = await conn.fetch(query, doc_type)
if not rows and doc_type in _MC_ALIAS_FALLBACK:
fallback = _MC_ALIAS_FALLBACK[doc_type]
logger.info("No MCs for %s -> falling back to %s", doc_type, fallback)
rows = await conn.fetch(query, fallback)
return [dict(r) for r in rows]
except Exception as e:
logger.warning("MC query failed: %s", e)
@@ -0,0 +1,180 @@
"""
Backfill the doc_check_controls.regulation + .article fields.
The fields are currently NULL on all 1874 rows. Many MCs cite the
relevant norm inline in title / check_question / pass_criteria
(e.g. 'Art. 6 Abs. 1 lit. a DSGVO', '§ 25 Abs. 1 TDDDG'). We detect
those with regex and UPDATE the row.
Run inside the bp-compliance-backend container:
docker exec bp-compliance-backend python3 /app/scripts/backfill_mc_regulation.py [--dry-run]
The script is idempotent: existing non-null regulation is never overwritten.
"""
from __future__ import annotations
import asyncio
import os
import re
import sys
import asyncpg
# Ordered: first match wins. Each pattern captures (article_str, regulation_label).
_PATTERNS: list[tuple[re.Pattern[str], str]] = [
# Art. X DSGVO / GDPR / EU 2016/679
(re.compile(
r"\b(?:art\.?|artikel)\s*"
r"(\d+[a-z]?(?:\s*(?:abs\.?|absatz)\s*\d+)?"
r"(?:\s*(?:lit\.?|litera|buchstabe)\s*[a-z])?"
r"(?:\s*satz\s*\d+)?)"
r"\s*(?:dsgvo|gdpr|vo\s*\(eu\)\s*2016/679|eu[\s-]?vo\s*2016/679)",
re.I,
), "DSGVO"),
# § X TDDDG / TTDSG
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?(?:\s*abs\.?\s*\d+)?(?:\s*(?:nr\.?|lit\.?)\s*\w+)?)\s*"
r"(?:tdddg|ttdsg|tkg)",
re.I,
), "TDDDG"),
# § X TMG
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?(?:\s*abs\.?\s*\d+)?(?:\s*nr\.?\s*\d+)?)\s*tmg\b",
re.I,
), "TMG"),
# § X BGB
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?(?:\s*abs\.?\s*\d+)?)\s*bgb\b",
re.I,
), "BGB"),
# § X HGB
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*hgb\b",
re.I,
), "HGB"),
# § X AO
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*ao\b",
re.I,
), "AO"),
# § X MStV (Medienstaatsvertrag)
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*m(?:edien)?st(?:aat)?v\b",
re.I,
), "MStV"),
# § X UWG
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*uwg\b",
re.I,
), "UWG"),
# § X VSBG (Verbraucherstreitbeilegung)
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*vsbg\b",
re.I,
), "VSBG"),
# § X PAngV
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*p(?:reis)?ang?v\b",
re.I,
), "PAngV"),
# § X GwG
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*gwg\b",
re.I,
), "GwG"),
# § X BDSG
(re.compile(
r"§\s*(\d+[a-z]?)\s*bdsg\b",
re.I,
), "BDSG"),
# EU-VO 524/2013 (ODR), 2018/1725 (EU-DSGVO) etc.
(re.compile(
r"\bart\.?\s*(\d+)\s*(?:eu[\s-]?vo|vo|verordnung)\s*(?:\(eu\)\s*)?(\d+/\d+)",
re.I,
), "EU-VO"),
# Norm names without numbers, last resort (set article=NULL)
(re.compile(r"\bdsgvo\b", re.I), "DSGVO"),
(re.compile(r"\btdddg\b|\bttdsg\b", re.I), "TDDDG"),
(re.compile(r"\btmg\b", re.I), "TMG"),
(re.compile(r"\bbgb\b", re.I), "BGB"),
(re.compile(r"\bmstv\b", re.I), "MStV"),
(re.compile(r"\buwg\b", re.I), "UWG"),
(re.compile(r"\bvsbg\b", re.I), "VSBG"),
(re.compile(r"\bgwg\b", re.I), "GwG"),
(re.compile(r"\bbdsg\b", re.I), "BDSG"),
]
def detect(text: str) -> tuple[str | None, str | None]:
"""Return (regulation, article) for the first pattern that matches."""
if not text:
return None, None
for pat, label in _PATTERNS:
m = pat.search(text)
if m:
article = m.group(1) if m.groups() else None
if label == "EU-VO" and m.lastindex and m.lastindex >= 2:
article = f"Art. {m.group(1)} EU-VO {m.group(2)}"
elif article:
article = re.sub(r"\s+", " ", article).strip()
return label, article
return None, None
async def main(dry_run: bool = False) -> None:
db = os.getenv("DATABASE_URL")
if not db:
print("DATABASE_URL not set", file=sys.stderr)
sys.exit(1)
conn = await asyncpg.connect(db)
rows = await conn.fetch(
"SELECT id, title, check_question, pass_criteria::text AS pc "
"FROM compliance.doc_check_controls "
"WHERE regulation IS NULL"
)
print(f"{len(rows)} MCs with NULL regulation")
updates: list[tuple[str | None, str | None, str]] = []
hits = {"DSGVO": 0, "TDDDG": 0, "TMG": 0, "BGB": 0, "MStV": 0,
"UWG": 0, "VSBG": 0, "EU-VO": 0, "HGB": 0, "AO": 0,
"PAngV": 0, "GwG": 0, "BDSG": 0}
no_match = 0
for r in rows:
combined = " ".join(filter(None, [
r["title"] or "", r["check_question"] or "", r["pc"] or "",
]))
reg, art = detect(combined)
if reg:
hits[reg] = hits.get(reg, 0) + 1
updates.append((reg, art, str(r["id"])))
else:
no_match += 1
print(f"Detected: {sum(hits.values())} | no match: {no_match}")
for k, v in sorted(hits.items(), key=lambda x: -x[1]):
if v:
print(f" {k:8s} {v:>5}")
if dry_run:
print("\nDRY RUN — no changes written. Re-run without --dry-run to apply.")
await conn.close()
return
# Apply updates in batches
BATCH = 200
for i in range(0, len(updates), BATCH):
chunk = updates[i:i + BATCH]
await conn.executemany(
"UPDATE compliance.doc_check_controls "
"SET regulation = $1, article = $2 WHERE id = $3::uuid",
chunk,
)
print(f"\nApplied {len(updates)} updates.")
await conn.close()
if __name__ == "__main__":
asyncio.run(main(dry_run="--dry-run" in sys.argv))