Allow disabling rate limiting for users via exceptions list from core

[bitterpanda63]

Summary by Aikido

Security Issues: 0	🔍 Quality Issues: 2	Resolved Issues: 0

⚡ Enhancements

• Allowed disabling rate limiting for specified users via core exceptions

^{More info}

[aikido-pr-checks]

Inline comment only restates the code's action; prefer explaining why excludedUserIdsFromRateLimiting matters or remove the comment.

Suggested change

	# Handle excluded user IDs from rate limiting
	# Apply server-configured exemptions to allow specific users to bypass rate limiting

Details

✨ AI Reasoning
​The new inline comment merely restates the purpose of the following code block (pulling excluded user IDs from the response). It doesn't provide context about expected shape, backward compatibility, or why this field matters, so it is a low-value 'what' comment.

_{Reply @AikidoSec feedback: [FEEDBACK] to get better review comments in the future.
Reply @AikidoSec ignore: [REASON] to ignore this issue.
More info}

[aikido-pr-checks]

Docstring repeats the method name/behavior without explaining why or expected semantics; replace with rationale (e.g., why exclusions exist or expected ID format) or remove the docstring.

Suggested change

	def update_excluded_user_ids_from_rate_limiting(self, user_ids):
	"""Replaces the set of user IDs excluded from rate limiting"""
	def update_excluded_user_ids_from_rate_limiting(self, user_ids):
	"""Updates the exclusion list to control which users bypass rate limiting checks"""

Details

✨ AI Reasoning
​The new docstring for the method simply restates what the method name and implementation already make obvious (it replaces the set of excluded user IDs). It provides no 'why' or additional context about expected formats or semantics, so it is a "what" comment that adds maintenance burden.

_{Reply @AikidoSec feedback: [FEEDBACK] to get better review comments in the future.
Reply @AikidoSec ignore: [REASON] to ignore this issue.
More info}