2026-08-16 00:24:33 +02:00
|
|
|
[
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
"name": "user-engine",
|
AUDIT-WP-0009-T03/T09 — evidence_kind, and approval-engine's registration inputs
T03. §9.6 gives load-bearing and attributive sources different obligations, so
the archive must record which one a source declared rather than infer it from
traffic. evidence_kind and completeness_trade now sit on SenderIdentity, the
AUDIT_CORE_SENDERS schema, and the non-secret scope overlay.
Two asymmetries are deliberate. The default is attributive, because the other
default would have audit-core imply a completeness obligation no source ever
accepted. And the overlay may raise the kind but never lower it — the same
principle that stops an ExternalSecret refresh shrinking user-engine's
tenants: a ConfigMap refresh must not drop a source's atomicity and detection
obligations without anyone deciding to. A load-bearing source may not carry a
completeness trade at all, since §9.6 requires atomicity of it, and
evidence_declaration() reports completeness_claimed: false for both kinds.
T09 (in progress). approval-engine's registration inputs are prepared and
recorded in docs/approval-engine-source-registration.md: scope entry declared
load-bearing, and audit-core-approval-engine-ingress with namespace and pod
label ANDed in one `from` peer — narrower than user-engine's namespace-only
rule, which is left unchanged. The scope entry lands ahead of the credential
because the overlay only applies to senders the Secret already carries, so it
admits nothing until the token exists; a test asserts that rather than
trusting the reading.
Two inputs remain approval-engine's: a confirmed tenant scope, since senders.py
requires a missing tenant restriction be justified per sender and audit-core
cannot justify it on another repo's behalf, and an explicit secret_policy
choice. Applying the manifests is an operator action.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185wifnLzCxjEY2MT1XbK7L
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
2026-09-06 22:31:37 +02:00
|
|
|
"sources": [
|
|
|
|
|
"user-engine"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"tenants": [
|
|
|
|
|
"*"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
2026-08-16 00:24:33 +02:00
|
|
|
"may_write": true,
|
|
|
|
|
"may_read": false
|
AUDIT-WP-0009-T03/T09 — evidence_kind, and approval-engine's registration inputs
T03. §9.6 gives load-bearing and attributive sources different obligations, so
the archive must record which one a source declared rather than infer it from
traffic. evidence_kind and completeness_trade now sit on SenderIdentity, the
AUDIT_CORE_SENDERS schema, and the non-secret scope overlay.
Two asymmetries are deliberate. The default is attributive, because the other
default would have audit-core imply a completeness obligation no source ever
accepted. And the overlay may raise the kind but never lower it — the same
principle that stops an ExternalSecret refresh shrinking user-engine's
tenants: a ConfigMap refresh must not drop a source's atomicity and detection
obligations without anyone deciding to. A load-bearing source may not carry a
completeness trade at all, since §9.6 requires atomicity of it, and
evidence_declaration() reports completeness_claimed: false for both kinds.
T09 (in progress). approval-engine's registration inputs are prepared and
recorded in docs/approval-engine-source-registration.md: scope entry declared
load-bearing, and audit-core-approval-engine-ingress with namespace and pod
label ANDed in one `from` peer — narrower than user-engine's namespace-only
rule, which is left unchanged. The scope entry lands ahead of the credential
because the overlay only applies to senders the Secret already carries, so it
admits nothing until the token exists; a test asserts that rather than
trusting the reading.
Two inputs remain approval-engine's: a confirmed tenant scope, since senders.py
requires a missing tenant restriction be justified per sender and audit-core
cannot justify it on another repo's behalf, and an explicit secret_policy
choice. Applying the manifests is an operator action.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185wifnLzCxjEY2MT1XbK7L
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
2026-09-06 22:31:37 +02:00
|
|
|
},
|
AUDIT-WP-0010 T01/T03/T04 — admit tenant-engine, and the envelope does not match
Registration: attributive, with the declared completeness_trade recorded on the
receiver side rather than only in the emitter, per §9.6's requirement that the
trade travel with the trail. tenants ["*"] is justified rather than inherited —
tenant-engine's events carry the affected tenant, the set is every tenant
including ones created later, and an explicit list would fail closed at exactly
the moment a tenant is provisioned, dead-lettering the creation evidence of the
tenant whose creation it is. source stays pinned exactly. Ingress ANDs namespace
and pod label; a weaker evidence class is not a reason for a wider network rule.
All inert until the token exists.
Then the finding T04 existed to find: tenant-engine cannot deliver a single
event today. envelope_for sends five required fields under other names —
event_id, action, resource, observed_at, details — and omits correlation_id
entirely, so normalize() raises invalid_event. Verified by running the real
envelope through the real function, not by reading.
Worse than an ordinary integration bug. The drain treats 400 as terminal, so the
outbox row is marked handled while audit-core holds only a dead letter, which is
not chained and is not custody. Lost on both sides, and since the drain is
non-blocking and attributive, nothing fails loudly — a silent total loss of the
stream presenting as a working integration.
Taking the correction the intake invited rather than accepting a lossy record.
normalize() is NOT relaxed to accept the alternate spellings: a receiver that
guesses which sender key means which stored field has made the mapping its own,
and the record stops being the sender's assertion. correlation_id cannot be
synthesized at all — an invented one ties an event to an operation audit-core
never observed.
Root cause is ours. The accepted envelope was published nowhere a sender could
read it; audit-backend-contract.md describes the stored record, and a sender
reading it would reasonably infer exactly the names tenant-engine used.
schema_version audit-core.event.v1alpha1 selects nothing here and gave a false
impression of a negotiated contract. Published docs/event-envelope.md as the
wire contract, including the point that a 400 means the event is not in the
archive and must be treated as a defect to fix rather than a delivery outcome.
T05 moved to wait: nothing to prove end to end until an event can be accepted.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Nb7Q6ZmXppNDkTWytfYqfv
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2069992@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 167dd7f8-2a25-4be1-aa46-3b6f1a5f94c6
2026-09-10 16:34:45 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
"name": "tenant-engine",
|
|
|
|
|
"sources": [
|
|
|
|
|
"tenant-engine"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"tenants": [
|
|
|
|
|
"*"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"may_write": true,
|
|
|
|
|
"may_read": false,
|
|
|
|
|
"evidence_kind": "attributive",
|
|
|
|
|
"completeness_trade": "outbox drains after commit, not inside the mutation transaction; declared at tenant-engine/docs/evidence-emission.md"
|
|
|
|
|
},
|
AUDIT-WP-0009-T03/T09 — evidence_kind, and approval-engine's registration inputs
T03. §9.6 gives load-bearing and attributive sources different obligations, so
the archive must record which one a source declared rather than infer it from
traffic. evidence_kind and completeness_trade now sit on SenderIdentity, the
AUDIT_CORE_SENDERS schema, and the non-secret scope overlay.
Two asymmetries are deliberate. The default is attributive, because the other
default would have audit-core imply a completeness obligation no source ever
accepted. And the overlay may raise the kind but never lower it — the same
principle that stops an ExternalSecret refresh shrinking user-engine's
tenants: a ConfigMap refresh must not drop a source's atomicity and detection
obligations without anyone deciding to. A load-bearing source may not carry a
completeness trade at all, since §9.6 requires atomicity of it, and
evidence_declaration() reports completeness_claimed: false for both kinds.
T09 (in progress). approval-engine's registration inputs are prepared and
recorded in docs/approval-engine-source-registration.md: scope entry declared
load-bearing, and audit-core-approval-engine-ingress with namespace and pod
label ANDed in one `from` peer — narrower than user-engine's namespace-only
rule, which is left unchanged. The scope entry lands ahead of the credential
because the overlay only applies to senders the Secret already carries, so it
admits nothing until the token exists; a test asserts that rather than
trusting the reading.
Two inputs remain approval-engine's: a confirmed tenant scope, since senders.py
requires a missing tenant restriction be justified per sender and audit-core
cannot justify it on another repo's behalf, and an explicit secret_policy
choice. Applying the manifests is an operator action.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185wifnLzCxjEY2MT1XbK7L
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
2026-09-06 22:31:37 +02:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
"name": "approval-engine",
|
|
|
|
|
"sources": [
|
|
|
|
|
"approval-engine"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"tenants": [
|
2026-09-08 17:01:41 +02:00
|
|
|
"tenant:platform"
|
AUDIT-WP-0009-T03/T09 — evidence_kind, and approval-engine's registration inputs
T03. §9.6 gives load-bearing and attributive sources different obligations, so
the archive must record which one a source declared rather than infer it from
traffic. evidence_kind and completeness_trade now sit on SenderIdentity, the
AUDIT_CORE_SENDERS schema, and the non-secret scope overlay.
Two asymmetries are deliberate. The default is attributive, because the other
default would have audit-core imply a completeness obligation no source ever
accepted. And the overlay may raise the kind but never lower it — the same
principle that stops an ExternalSecret refresh shrinking user-engine's
tenants: a ConfigMap refresh must not drop a source's atomicity and detection
obligations without anyone deciding to. A load-bearing source may not carry a
completeness trade at all, since §9.6 requires atomicity of it, and
evidence_declaration() reports completeness_claimed: false for both kinds.
T09 (in progress). approval-engine's registration inputs are prepared and
recorded in docs/approval-engine-source-registration.md: scope entry declared
load-bearing, and audit-core-approval-engine-ingress with namespace and pod
label ANDed in one `from` peer — narrower than user-engine's namespace-only
rule, which is left unchanged. The scope entry lands ahead of the credential
because the overlay only applies to senders the Secret already carries, so it
admits nothing until the token exists; a test asserts that rather than
trusting the reading.
Two inputs remain approval-engine's: a confirmed tenant scope, since senders.py
requires a missing tenant restriction be justified per sender and audit-core
cannot justify it on another repo's behalf, and an explicit secret_policy
choice. Applying the manifests is an operator action.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0185wifnLzCxjEY2MT1XbK7L
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
2026-09-06 22:31:37 +02:00
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"may_write": true,
|
|
|
|
|
"may_read": false,
|
|
|
|
|
"evidence_kind": "load-bearing"
|
AUDIT-WP-0009-T11 — register informed-decision, and answer GH-DEC-2026-014
informed-decision is the browser-facing approver surface; GH-DEC-2026-012
limit 3 makes its evidence copy the one that must reach audit-core
independently of the emitter, because there the actor being audited and the
evidence source are the same component.
Registration accepted on every proposed field — exact source,
["tenant:platform"], write true, read false, load-bearing, secret_policy
redact. Prepared and inert: the scope overlay applies only to a sender the
Secret already carries, asserted by test rather than by reading. Ingress ANDs
namespace and pod label in one peer, following approval-engine rather than
user-engine's older breadth.
Gate House asked whether the record shape can carry a source-held-content
declaration with a retrieval expectation, and asked for a straight answer
rather than a rule the storage cannot meet. Both halves, which must travel
together:
It CAN carry the declaration. data is stored verbatim into details.data and
hash-chained, so content_exists and custody need no schema change and become
as tamper-evident as the commitment they accompany.
It CANNOT detect non-production. audit-core performs no retrieval and its
egress permits Postgres and DNS only. Detection happens at retrieval, by the
reviewer; the stored declaration is what turns a blank into a failure
attributable to the named custodian.
Residual stated rather than left to be found: a custodian that never held the
content can emit a false content_exists. audit-core validates the declaration's
shape, never its truth — the same class as omission at source, and not closed
by the chain, by attestation, or by T04/T06. A test asserts no egress to the
emitter exists, because that claim silently stops being true if one appears.
Cadence: reconciliation plus heartbeat is right for a mixed-volume source, with
both scoped per class rather than per source — a per-source heartbeat is
satisfied by the high-volume presentation stream and says nothing about a quiet
month of dispositions. Bound: a compromised emitter suppresses the event and
its own count together.
Also recorded: commitment-only satisfies non-alteration and never
reconstructability, in this repo's documents as in theirs; and tenant
provenance under GH-DEC-2026-013 lands in the registration record, not the
envelope, since audit-core checks a value the credential may write rather than
resolving an identity claim.
No secret was created and no production manifest applied.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Nb7Q6ZmXppNDkTWytfYqfv
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2069992@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 167dd7f8-2a25-4be1-aa46-3b6f1a5f94c6
2026-09-10 15:15:35 +02:00
|
|
|
},
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
"name": "informed-decision",
|
|
|
|
|
"sources": [
|
|
|
|
|
"informed-decision"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"tenants": [
|
|
|
|
|
"tenant:platform"
|
|
|
|
|
],
|
|
|
|
|
"may_write": true,
|
|
|
|
|
"may_read": false,
|
|
|
|
|
"evidence_kind": "load-bearing"
|
2026-08-16 00:24:33 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
]
|