The ruling names docs/approval-claim.md as the step-1 artifact on the GH-DEC-2026-003 path, but the contract did not say so. It listed only access-engine as consumer, so an implementer reading the governed artifact alone would not learn that PEP-shaped consumers read it as step 1, that no other envelope may be served from that endpoint, or that a PEP validates across this claim and the step-2 DecisionEnvelope. State the two-artifact split and the layer rule at the top, and state that the approval fact's authority is this engine -- a consumer requiring a state-hub authority fails closed against every correctly issued response, which is the defect GH-DEC-2026-005 struck. Point both consumers at the existing Required verification section. Also update the request doc's trailing record block from proposed to resolved with its decision id, so a reader copying it does not reintroduce a pending record for a settled question. Docs only; 84 tests pass. 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
5.4 KiB
Approval claim contract
Schema: ../schemas/approval_claim.schema.json
Version: 0.1
Issuer: approval-engine
Consumers: access-engine as PDP (flex-auth until the governed rename);
PEP-shaped consumers as step 1 of the GH-DEC-2026-003 consumption path
This is the input claim access-engine consumes under statute §6.2. It is a
fact about an approval object. It is not a decision. An implementer can
satisfy this document without reading this engine's source.
This is the step-1 artifact. GH-DEC-2026-005 (2026-09-06) confirms that
GET /v1/approvals/{id}/claim serves this claim on the GH-DEC-2026-003 path,
that no other envelope is required or may be served from this endpoint, and
that a PEP validates across two artifacts: this claim for the approval
fact, and the step-2 flex-auth DecisionEnvelope for exact CheckRequest
match and the policy package/version pin. Each artifact is validated against
the layer that owns its data; a PIP does not republish the PDP's decision. The
"Required verification" section below is the supported path for both consumers.
The authority for the approval fact is this engine — issuer: "approval-engine". State Hub is a read model and issues no approval; a
consumer requiring a state-hub authority on this claim fails closed against
every correctly issued response. GH-DEC-2026-005 struck that requirement
explicitly.
Yields to the Taxonomy request-claim schema (statute §17) when that artifact exists and is assented. This local shape is not permanent.
Fetch
GET /v1/approvals/{id}/claim
Fail-closed when this engine's store is unavailable (HTTP 503). An audit-core
outage does not affect this read.
There is no /v1/check, no /authorize, and no field named effect,
decision, allow, or deny. If a response contains those, it is out of
contract.
What the claim carries
| Field | Why |
|---|---|
approval_id |
Reconstructable from the decision record. |
binding.digest |
Distinguishes approved from approved for this exact request. |
binding.pdp_digest |
Optional. When recorded at issue, compare to NewDecisionBinding.request_digest. |
issuer |
Always approval-engine. |
freshness |
So the PDP can state a deadline for this input class (§9.7.2), not a single fiction covering every source. |
valid_now |
Current-state predicate. Not permission. |
reason_code |
Why valid_now is false, when it is. |
valid_now is true only when all of:
- enough distinct authenticated approvers have been recorded;
- now is inside
validity.not_before…validity.expires_at; - the object is not consumed, superseded, revoked, or expired.
Holding a claim with valid_now: true is not authority to act. It is one
input the decision point weighs.
Canonical binding digest
The native digest is:
sha256: + hex( SHA-256( canonical_json({action, actor, principal, purpose, target}) ) )
canonical_json is UTF-8 JSON with sorted keys at every object level and no
insignificant whitespace (separators=(',', ':')). target is an object; its
keys are sorted too.
Wrong-action, wrong-target, and wrong-scope are distinguishable because they change that JSON and therefore the digest. A decision rendered against approval A for request R cannot be replayed for request R' if the consumer compares digests.
Mapping from a flex-auth CheckRequest
| Claim binding | CheckRequest |
|---|---|
action |
action |
target |
resource (object) |
actor |
subject.id |
principal |
subject.attributes.principal if present, else subject.id |
purpose |
context.purpose |
Go's json.Marshal of a CheckRequest is not this canonical JSON (field
order and omitempty differ). Do not hash a CheckRequest with this function
and expect it to equal NewDecisionBinding.request_digest.
When the issuer recorded the PDP digest at issue time, it is in
binding.pdp_digest. Prefer that comparison at decision time:
claim.binding.pdp_digest == decision.binding.request_digest
and still require claim.approval_id to match the approval named on the
request. Native binding.digest remains the identifier of this engine's
binding, and is what T-06 uses when no PDP digest was recorded.
Freshness
Default TTL is 30 seconds from observed_at. not_after is
observed_at + ttl_seconds. A PDP that needs a different deadline for the
approval input class states it in its own provenance; it must not invent
freshness this engine did not publish.
A claim used after freshness.not_after is stale. Stale is not the same as
valid_now: false — the object may still be valid; the observation is old.
Re-fetch.
Required verification (consumer)
A production consumer of this claim, before treating it as an input, checks:
- The claim resolved from this engine; an outage fails the action closed.
issuerisapproval-engine.valid_nowis true andconsumedis false.binding.digestequals the digest of the binding the consumer computed from the proposed action, orbinding.pdp_digestequals theNewDecisionBindingdigest of that request.freshness.not_afteris still in the future.reason_codeisok.
Local fixtures, workplan ids, and prose are not this claim.
Examples
See ../examples/claim.valid.json and
../examples/claim.revoked.json.