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
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-09-10:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2069992@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 167dd7f8-2a25-4be1-aa46-3b6f1a5f94c6
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
The detection half audit-core argued up to a MUST and then could not support.
Two registered sources were waiting on it.
T04, heartbeats. A heartbeat is an ordinary event — same envelope, same
append-only custody, same chain, no special table. Deliberate: a heartbeat
stored outside the chain would be the one record here that could be back-dated.
Declared per class rather than per source, because a per-source heartbeat from
a mixed-volume emitter is satisfied by its chattiest class and says nothing
about the quiet, security-relevant one, which is the only reason heartbeats
exist. Not the §17 cadence schema T05 waits on: cadence describes expected
rate, this says how often a source promises to say "nothing to report" for a
class that may legitimately be silent.
no_heartbeat_since_registration is its own finding kind rather than a skip —
it is the case most likely to be a broken integration and the one a naive
"compare against last seen" implementation silently drops. Grace widens the
window so one late run does not flap; it never removes a finding.
T06, reconciliation. Counts, never payloads. The awkward part is that every
registered sender holds may_read: false, which taken literally makes the §9.6
reconciliation obligation undischargeable by every source actually registered.
Resolved by observing that a source asking how many of its own events we hold
is not reading the archive — it learns nothing it did not itself emit. So the
surface is scoped to the caller's own sources and tenants and returns no
payloads; anything wider stays behind may_read and full tenant scope. Another
source's counts return 403 rather than an empty count, because a zero would
read as "we hold none of yours" — a false answer to a question about
completeness. No default window, since a count whose bounds the caller did not
choose is not comparable to anything the caller computed.
T07, the findings surface. /v1/stream-findings, following the dead-letter and
secret-finding conventions: may_read plus full tenant scope, since findings
span every sender and carry no tenant key to filter on.
The bound is on every response rather than in a document nobody opens beside
it. A missing heartbeat is not proof of suppression, and agreement on counts
proves neither completeness nor that any event occurred. Both controls cover
loss, outage, drain failure and accident; neither covers a source lying about
itself, and where the emitter is compromised both agree with it. Closing that
needs an observer independent of the emitter, which §16 put outside our scope.
The scope overlay may shorten a heartbeat interval or add a class, never
lengthen or remove one — same asymmetry as evidence_kind, and for the same
reason: a ConfigMap refresh must not widen the window in which a suppressed
class goes unnoticed without anyone deciding to.
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
T02. deploy/attest-cronjob.yaml: daily at 03:17 UTC against the 168h window,
its own ServiceAccount, and a Role reaching exactly one named ConfigMap —
get/update/patch, no create, no list. audit_core/attest_publish.py does the
publish in stdlib; the image carries no kubectl, and adding one to an audit
receiver's image to write a single file is the worse trade.
Three refusals, all deliberate:
The producer is not the receiver. A receiver that could rewrite its own
attestation could forge it. audit-core-egress is now scoped to
component: receiver and a separate audit-core-attest-egress carries the 6443
rule, so the receiver never gains API-server reach. Asserted by test.
It refuses to publish over a broken chain. A fresh head written over a break
replaces an honest chain_break with a fresh-looking attestation. Stale
degrades the claim visibly; false does not.
Mounted as a directory, not subPath. Found while writing the manifest: a
subPath ConfigMap mount is resolved once at pod start and never updates, so
the daily attestation would land in the ConfigMap and never reach the running
receiver — tamper_evidence would age out to false while the job reported
success every night, silent in both directions.
The offsite copy stays an operator step. audit-core holds no Nextcloud
credential and should not acquire one to publish a hash, so docs/integrity.md
states the bound plainly: until that copy exists the delivered control defends
against a database owner, not a cluster owner, and no stronger claim may be
made from it.
T10. layer.yaml lists four infrastructure contacts — platform-pg, state-hub,
kube-apiserver, the container registry — each with its role and whether another
layer reads it. tooling_contacts stays [], which is true under §5 as written;
the companion's totality request is met by the uncatalogued list rather than by
inventing a Tooling row. tests/test_layer_conformance.py derives the egress
destinations from the manifests and the registry from the pinned digests, so a
new contact appearing in deploy/ without a row fails the test rather than
waiting for a reviewer to notice.
Applying the manifests remains an operator action; nothing here was 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
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
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
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-09-10:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2069992@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 167dd7f8-2a25-4be1-aa46-3b6f1a5f94c6
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
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
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-09-06:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
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
Picks up AUDIT-WP-0010 and this session's T01/T08 closures. AUDIT-WP-0009 is
active, not ready — the index was regenerated mid-run, before fix-consistency
renormalized the lifecycle state.
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
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-09-06:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-09-06:
- workplan status: ready → active
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713962@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2718d99d-d3ff-478f-83a2-3a30f01a02fc
glas-harness reports approval-engine production startup now requires audit
delivery, putting sender registration on the deployment critical path. The
task's note read the dependency backwards: audit-core is not waiting for a
producer to emit, the producer is waiting for a sender identity.
T03 is promoted with it. §9.4 makes approval evidence load-bearing and there
is nowhere to record that until evidence_kind exists; registering ahead of T03
would admit a load-bearing source into a system that would silently treat it
as attributive, which is the defect §9.6 names.
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
§9.4 forbids audit-core answering whether an approval is still valid: a
consumer branching on such an answer would route an authorization decision
through the audit fabric. The prohibition was honoured by absence, which is
not the estate's idiom — §6.4 obligation 3 requires a published stance to
equal shipped behaviour asserted by test.
Written against shapes rather than today's route list, so adding a validity
surface later fails here rather than passing quietly. Plausible verdict paths
must 404 rather than 403: a distinguishable forbidden would imply a surface
exists behind auth. No backend class, Postgres included, may carry a
verdict-shaped method name. The declaration must stay in layer.yaml,
INTENT.md and SCOPE.md.
The last test guards the opposite error — an approval-shaped event class is
still ingestible, because the prohibition bounds the verdict, not the record.
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
The Postgres backend returned tamper_evidence=True as a constant while
docs/integrity.md permits the claim only when a live external chain-head
attestation exists. The one attestation on record is 2026-08-16 and no job
renews it, so audit-core was telling every sender it had a property whose
precondition was unverified — the §9.6 defect it twice corrected in
gate-house's doctrine, turned inward.
evaluate_tamper_evidence() derives the flag from the chain report and the
mounted attestation, distinguishing seven states. Absence, staleness,
mismatch, an undated or unreadable attestation, a chain break, and an
unwalkable chain all degrade the claim rather than leave it standing.
Unreadable is treated as absent on purpose: a malformed file must not hold
up a claim a missing file would drop.
The freshness window is 168h against an intended daily cadence — seven
cadences, so a handful of missed runs degrade the claim rather than a single
one flapping it. Window and cadence are one contract in docs/integrity.md.
Production /readyz will now report tamper_evidence: false until
AUDIT-WP-0009-T02 schedules attestation. The claim was already false; it now
says so.
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
Closes the path for AUDIT-IN-0002. tenant-engine emits through a local
outbox and cannot land production events until audit-core admits the
sender, so this is another repo's production blocked on ours — a
workplan of its own rather than a task inside AUDIT-WP-0009.
The request arrives with its bound already declared: attributive class,
non-blocking drain, trade documented at tenant-engine/docs/evidence-
emission.md. Under §9.6 that is legitimate. Nothing needs renegotiating;
it needs admitting.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpeL68AWHqtqPQZEXY5kFe
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-08-29:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
Both were untracked and blocked registrar-reconcile's clean-worktree
precondition, leaving AUDIT-WP-0009 and AUDIT-IN-0001 unregistered.
.repo-manager/index.json follows the estate convention — ops-warden,
flex-auth and kings-guard all track it; only gate-house ignores it.
TamqMessagingIntroduction.md is received documentation that belongs in
the repo.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpeL68AWHqtqPQZEXY5kFe
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
The standard is accepted at v0.7 and all three of audit-core's v0.6
findings landed in it (§9.6 threat decomposition, cadence MUST for
load-bearing sources with reconciliation/heartbeat for low-volume
classes, §3.3's Evidence row restated as an estate trade).
INTENT.md: layer/role declared in frontmatter as §11 and companion §2
require — layer.yaml alone did not discharge it. Layer section rewritten
for the Evidence role and its obligations. New Evidence Bound section
carrying the §9.6 sound/unsound forms and the three-row threat table,
including the residual nothing in the model prevents.
SCOPE.md: replaced the statehub register stub, which carried no boundary
at all. Statute-fixed prohibitions now live here, separated from the
merely-not-yet — §16 ruled the stronger-custody gap closed, so WORM and
data.archive are not ours rather than not yet.
Assessment found nine gaps. Headline: postgres_backend returns
tamper_evidence=True unconditionally while docs/integrity.md permits it
only against a live external attestation, and the one on record is
2026-08-16 with no job renewing it — audit-core overclaiming its own
bound, the §9.6 defect turned inward. Also: no cadence, heartbeat,
reconciliation, or load-bearing classification exists, so the obligation
audit-core argued up from SHOULD to MUST is not yet dischargeable
against audit-core.
AUDIT-WP-0009 raised, ten tasks.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpeL68AWHqtqPQZEXY5kFe
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
All three v0.4 findings landed in v0.5 (local outbox, machine-readable
declaration, §14 arithmetic). §9.6's load-bearing/attributive split and
§16's ruling on approval custody both improve on what audit-core raised.
Findings, all correcting audit-core's own contribution: (1) the local
outbox closes accidental omission, not the compromised-source case §9.6
opens with — a compromised emitter can decline the insert or drop the row
before drain; §16 rests a ruling on that conflation. (2) cadence is the
only control touching the residual and is a SHOULD, and rate-based
detection is weakest for the rare negative events §9.6 says matter most —
recommend positive reconciliation for load-bearing low-volume classes.
(3) §3.3's Evidence row states an availability/independence trade as a
property of evidence engines.
Adds layer.yaml in ops-warden's reference form, per §11.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpeL68AWHqtqPQZEXY5kFe
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
gate-house incorporated all of audit-core's AUDIT-IN-0001 corrections and
generalized the omission bound into §9.6 as estate-wide doctrine.
Findings: (1) §9.4's emission MUST is safe only if the outbox is local;
"or equivalent" admits a synchronous emit to audit-core inside the state
transaction, which would make an audit outage an inability to revoke —
recommend one sentence requiring the queue live in approval-engine's own
store. (2) §11's new who-must-declare rule is not mechanically checkable
despite §11 claiming it is; recommend a canonical frontmatter form.
(3) §14 says "seven of fifteen" and "remaining eight" but enumerates nine;
the catalog has 16 estate-authored rows.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpeL68AWHqtqPQZEXY5kFe
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
gate-house proposed (security layer model v0.3 §9.4) that audit-core own
the tamper-evident record of approvals while approval-engine owns the
operative state. Assented, with two corrections and one condition.
Correction 1: INTENT principle 6 overstated the delivered guarantee.
docs/integrity.md is authoritative — an in-database chain does not
withstand a database owner without the external chain-head attestation,
and even then it is not WORM. Principle 6 now points at that bound.
Correction 2: the chain proves alteration and truncation, not omission
at source. A suppressed revocation leaves the chain intact.
Condition: approval-engine must guarantee emission atomicity, so an
approval cannot change state without the event being durably queued in
the same transaction. Not a task audit-core can discharge for it.
Boundary: no approval-validity query will be exposed — that would be
deciding early under §6.1.
Also declares audit-core's layer (Engine, not a decision point), which
§11 requires and INTENT.md was missing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WpeL68AWHqtqPQZEXY5kFe
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4040362@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4fd0fd24-2ee8-4413-bd67-43bd79ca73f1
Regenerated by fix-consistency; adds AUDIT-IN-0001.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2564823@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2a7ed827-4928-4b9f-8613-9135c9cadfe9
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-08-25:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2583210@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: f2bff2d5-e9b2-4338-92ca-10282a927006
These workplans exist only in the retired local hub. Their random pre-ADR-007
identifiers are refused by C-06 as stale references, so they cannot be
registered. Deriving from the canonical record id takes no identity from
anything: central does not hold them and the old ids die with the cache.
Records central already holds were deliberately left untouched.
Refs CUST-WP-0068-T06
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2583210@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: f2bff2d5-e9b2-4338-92ca-10282a927006
Updated by fix-consistency on 2026-08-25:
- update .custodian-brief.md for audit-core
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2583210@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: f2bff2d5-e9b2-4338-92ca-10282a927006
The remote row pointed at 127.0.0.1:18000, a reverse tunnel back to the
workstation. On railiance01 the State Hub runs in the cluster on that same
machine, so the request left the box and came back to reach a local service.
Refs CUST-WP-0067-T07
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2583210@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: f2bff2d5-e9b2-4338-92ca-10282a927006
