fix(wsgi): Gate url.full, url.path, and http.query behind send_default_pii

[ericapisani]

The WSGI integration now gates url.full, url.path, and http.query span attributes behind send_default_pii, consistent with how client.address is already handled. These attributes can contain user-provided query parameters and path segments that may include PII, so they should not be captured by default.

Fixes PY-2552
Fixes#6653

[linear-code]

PY-2552

[github-actions]

Codecov Results 📊

✅ 89867 passed | ⏭️ 6240 skipped | Total: 96107 | Pass Rate: 93.51% | Execution Time: 323m 58s

📊 Comparison with Base Branch

Metric	Change
Total Tests	📈 +30
Passed Tests	📈 +30
Failed Tests	—
Skipped Tests	—

All tests are passing successfully.

✅ Patch coverage is 100.00%. Project has 2394 uncovered lines.
✅ Project coverage is 89.93%. Comparing base (base) to head (head).

Files with missing lines (1)

File	Patch %	Lines
sentry_sdk/integrations/wsgi.py	100.00%	⚠️ 1 partials

Coverage diff

@@ Coverage Diff @@## main #PR +/-##
==========================================
+ Coverage 89.88% 89.93% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 192 192 —
Lines 23763 23766 +3
Branches 8206 8208 +2
==========================================
+ Hits 21358 21372 +14- Misses 2405 2394 -11- Partials 1345 1342 -3

---

Generated by Codecov Action

[sentry]

Bug: The WSGI integration leaks PII in non-streaming transaction events by unconditionally adding url and query_string, even when send_default_pii is False.
_{Severity: HIGH}

Suggested Fix

In the _make_wsgi_event_processor function, wrap the assignments for request_info["url"] and request_info["query_string"] in a conditional check for should_send_default_pii(). This will ensure that PII is consistently redacted across both streaming and non-streaming code paths, respecting the user's setting.

Prompt for AI Agent

Review the code at the location below. A potential bug has been identified by an AI
agent. Verify if this is a real issue. If it is, propose a fix; if not, explain why it's
not valid.
Location: tests/integrations/wsgi/test_wsgi.py#L265-L276
Potential issue: The WSGI integration aims to prevent sending Personally Identifiable
Information (PII) when `send_default_pii` is `False`. While the change correctly redacts
PII for span attributes in the streaming path (`_get_request_attributes`), it fails to
do so for the non-streaming transaction event path. The `_make_wsgi_event_processor`
function unconditionally sets `request["url"]` and `request["query_string"]` on the
event. This results in an inconsistent behavior where users who set
`send_default_pii=False` will still have unredacted URLs and query strings sent in
transaction events if they are not using the span streaming path, leading to an
unintended PII leak.

_{Did we get this right? 👍 / 👎 to inform future reviews.}

[alexander-alderman-webb]

I'm not convinced that not gating URL attribute behind send_default_pii is considered a sufficiently severe bug that allows us to break existing behavior.
I'll stamp given precedent in #6501.

[cursor]

Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.

^{❌ Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with cloud agents, enable autofix in the Cursor dashboard.}

Want reviews to match your repository better? Bugbot Learning can learn team-specific rules from PR activity. A team admin can enable Learning in the Cursor dashboard.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 6273bbd. Configure here.}

[cursor]

url.path omits SCRIPT_NAME prefix

Medium Severity

When send_default_pii is enabled, url.path is taken from PATH_INFO only, while url.full is built with get_request_url, which merges SCRIPT_NAME and PATH_INFO. Mounted WSGI apps can therefore emit spans where url.path and url.full describe different paths.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 6273bbd. Configure here.}

[ericapisani]

I'm not convinced that not gating URL attribute behind send_default_pii is considered a sufficiently severe bug that allows us to break existing behavior.

If we decide to talk about this more, we should make it a thread/convo with some other folks outside of this PR. One could argue that we were breaking the contract set out by our conventions/attributes by not doing so, and, in another case for a different attribute relatively recently, we considered it sufficiently severe that we called an incident over it to correct this.