Masking with functions uses wrong rule settings

In an scenario where I have 2 tables: table1 and table2, both containing a column named field, and a rule:

{

   "replace": {

       "table": "table1",

       "column": "field"

   },

   "with": {

      "fill": "X"

   }

}

for a query like

select * from table2 where field = 1;

I get the error:

The function = is used in conjunction with a field that should be masked for 'user'@'xxxxx', access is denied.

So, even when there is no rule for field over table2, I still get the validation error.

The issue can be circumvented by adding the table name or an alias to that table in the query, like in:

select * from table2 where table2.field = 1;

Shouldn't the proxy use table and column to search for rules instead of only the column?