approval-engine/examples/claim.revoked.json

33 lines
926 B
JSON
Raw Normal View History

{
"schema_version": "0.1",
"kind": "approval-claim",
State pdp_digest explicitly; decline to publish a vocabulary mapping flex-auth asked whether this engine should publish an action/target mapping between the claim binding's vocabulary (secrets.kv.destroy, {"id": "lane-openbao-root"}) and a policy package's (destroy, lane:...), since their package makes no cross-check that a claim was approved for the action being decided. Answered no. A PIP asserting that one vocabulary's action means another's would author policy semantics it does not own, over vocabularies it does not own, and the failure mode is asymmetric: a wrong mapping silently accepts a claim approved for a different action, which is worse than no mapping. binding.pdp_digest is the correspondence and sidesteps vocabulary entirely -- it compares the PDP's own digest to the PDP's own digest, with no translation by anyone. Implemented the part that was ours. pdp_digest was emitted only when recorded, so a consumer could not distinguish "not issued against a decision" from "we forgot to look". It is now always present and null in that case, required-but-nullable in the schema, and documented as something a PEP on a privileged lane must refuse. This engine states the fact; enforcing the lane's policy stays with the consumer. Both published examples were already contradicting the updated schema by omitting the field -- the same fixture-versus-contract defect flex-auth hit twice this week and that secrets-engine implemented. Fixed both, made them cover the PDP-bound and unbound shapes so neither is inferred from the other, and added tests/test_examples.py to validate every example against the schema so the class cannot recur here. jsonschema added as a dev dependency. 94 tests pass (6 new). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TvyJPAaVCGsVheVhcCwNND Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 411227@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: d566f6d3-bcaf-43c3-bc5e-3ddd0f64b535
2026-09-06 09:32:11 +02:00
"yields_to": "net-kingdom taxonomy request-claim schema (statute \u00a717; unassigned)",
"issuer": "approval-engine",
"approval_id": "3d1c0a8e-6b7f-4c21-9a0e-1f2b3c4d5e6f",
"state": "revoked",
"valid_now": false,
"consumed": false,
"binding": {
"action": "secrets.kv.destroy",
State pdp_digest explicitly; decline to publish a vocabulary mapping flex-auth asked whether this engine should publish an action/target mapping between the claim binding's vocabulary (secrets.kv.destroy, {"id": "lane-openbao-root"}) and a policy package's (destroy, lane:...), since their package makes no cross-check that a claim was approved for the action being decided. Answered no. A PIP asserting that one vocabulary's action means another's would author policy semantics it does not own, over vocabularies it does not own, and the failure mode is asymmetric: a wrong mapping silently accepts a claim approved for a different action, which is worse than no mapping. binding.pdp_digest is the correspondence and sidesteps vocabulary entirely -- it compares the PDP's own digest to the PDP's own digest, with no translation by anyone. Implemented the part that was ours. pdp_digest was emitted only when recorded, so a consumer could not distinguish "not issued against a decision" from "we forgot to look". It is now always present and null in that case, required-but-nullable in the schema, and documented as something a PEP on a privileged lane must refuse. This engine states the fact; enforcing the lane's policy stays with the consumer. Both published examples were already contradicting the updated schema by omitting the field -- the same fixture-versus-contract defect flex-auth hit twice this week and that secrets-engine implemented. Fixed both, made them cover the PDP-bound and unbound shapes so neither is inferred from the other, and added tests/test_examples.py to validate every example against the schema so the class cannot recur here. jsonschema added as a dev dependency. 94 tests pass (6 new). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TvyJPAaVCGsVheVhcCwNND Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 411227@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: d566f6d3-bcaf-43c3-bc5e-3ddd0f64b535
2026-09-06 09:32:11 +02:00
"target": {
"id": "lane-openbao-root",
"stage": "prod"
},
"actor": "agt-secrets-engine",
"principal": "bernd",
"purpose": "rotate-exposed-key",
State pdp_digest explicitly; decline to publish a vocabulary mapping flex-auth asked whether this engine should publish an action/target mapping between the claim binding's vocabulary (secrets.kv.destroy, {"id": "lane-openbao-root"}) and a policy package's (destroy, lane:...), since their package makes no cross-check that a claim was approved for the action being decided. Answered no. A PIP asserting that one vocabulary's action means another's would author policy semantics it does not own, over vocabularies it does not own, and the failure mode is asymmetric: a wrong mapping silently accepts a claim approved for a different action, which is worse than no mapping. binding.pdp_digest is the correspondence and sidesteps vocabulary entirely -- it compares the PDP's own digest to the PDP's own digest, with no translation by anyone. Implemented the part that was ours. pdp_digest was emitted only when recorded, so a consumer could not distinguish "not issued against a decision" from "we forgot to look". It is now always present and null in that case, required-but-nullable in the schema, and documented as something a PEP on a privileged lane must refuse. This engine states the fact; enforcing the lane's policy stays with the consumer. Both published examples were already contradicting the updated schema by omitting the field -- the same fixture-versus-contract defect flex-auth hit twice this week and that secrets-engine implemented. Fixed both, made them cover the PDP-bound and unbound shapes so neither is inferred from the other, and added tests/test_examples.py to validate every example against the schema so the class cannot recur here. jsonschema added as a dev dependency. 94 tests pass (6 new). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TvyJPAaVCGsVheVhcCwNND Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 411227@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: d566f6d3-bcaf-43c3-bc5e-3ddd0f64b535
2026-09-06 09:32:11 +02:00
"digest": "sha256:aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa",
"pdp_digest": null
},
"freshness": {
"observed_at": "2026-08-29T12:05:00+00:00",
"ttl_seconds": 30,
"not_after": "2026-08-29T12:05:30+00:00"
},
"validity": {
"not_before": "2026-08-29T11:00:00+00:00",
"expires_at": "2026-08-29T15:00:00+00:00"
},
"reason_code": "revoked"
}