fix(decision): registry facts win over caller-supplied attributes
secrets-engine's first live request rejected our allow: binding. request_digest is computed over material they never sent, because we enrich subject and resource from the registry before hashing. Answering that meant reading the enrichment path, which had a worse defect in it. Enrichment was additive-if-absent — addAttribute wrote a registry value only where the request had no value for that key. So where a caller supplied a key, the caller's value won and the registry's never applied. Every registry ceiling and allowlist was advisory. Verified against the shipped ops-warden package, each one added key on an otherwise-denied request: max_ttl_hours: 99 registry says 8 -> allowed a 12h certificate allowed_principals registry allowlist -> disallowed_principal bypassed allowed_subjects registry allowlist -> unknown_subject bypassed The third is the one to read twice: a subject the registry does not know authorized itself by naming itself in the allowlist it was being checked against. Not remotely reachable today — the PEP builds the CheckRequest, ops-warden sends no resource.attributes, and enforce admits one identity. It is a defence-in-depth failure: any path that lets attacker-influenced data into a CheckRequest field became a full policy bypass rather than a bounded input problem. Callers sending resource.attributes is not hypothetical; secrets-engine does it on every request. Registry facts now win, and diagnostics.registry_overrode names every displaced key, because a registry that silently discards a contradicting claim hides that a caller asserted authority it did not have. subject.type is carved out, and the reason is a finding of its own. Making the registry win there denied every secrets-engine allow: the registry's type is CARING vocabulary (Human, Agent, Automation, Service) and the request's is the protected system's actor vocabulary (service, adm, agt, atm). Two fields sharing a name; substituting one for the other is translation rather than identity, which GH-DEC-2026-008 ruled against. Note what surfaced it — the registry's type had been dead data since the field existed, because the caller's value always won. Also publishes binding.submitted_request_digest, over the request exactly as sent. request_digest was published as the consumer replay test and cannot be one. Nothing is lost hashing the pre-enrichment form: enrichment is a function of the request and the snapshot, and registry_snapshot_digest already pins the snapshot. Existing pins do not move. All three replay fixtures' request_digest and approval_binding_digest values are byte-identical — those requests contradict no registry fact. A field to add, not a value to correct. Regression tests verified failing against the old behaviour before being kept. FLEX-DEC-2026-012; FLEX-WP-0025 carries the residual, that a policy still cannot tell a fact from an assertion. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014aQMM1dPXaPiXVn6DwwtLd Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 715613@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: fabd95c1-4c9e-4080-8849-8707ae025f80
This commit is contained in:
parent
c861d75703
commit
0bc624ba62
14 changed files with 822 additions and 34 deletions
|
|
@ -31,6 +31,30 @@ go run ./cmd/flex-auth check \
|
|||
|
||||
Verified identical across two runs.
|
||||
|
||||
**Regenerated 2026-09-07 — `submitted_request_digest` added; every existing
|
||||
digest unchanged.** From `FLEX-DEC-2026-012`, which `secrets-engine` found by
|
||||
running against the live pin.
|
||||
|
||||
`request_digest` is computed over the **enriched** request — after the evaluator
|
||||
overlays registry facts onto subject and resource — so it is not
|
||||
consumer-computable and never was. Pin **`submitted_request_digest`** instead:
|
||||
it is the digest over the request exactly as sent, and it is the §6.4.2 replay
|
||||
test. `request_digest` keeps both its meaning as flex-auth's own audit-replay
|
||||
identity and its exact value here — `de67324f…`, `c749ee2d…`, `c9c6e6f8…` are
|
||||
unchanged, as is `approval_binding_digest` at `fa07bec…`. The enrichment
|
||||
precedence changed in the same decision but these three requests contradict no
|
||||
registry fact, so nothing they hash moved. **Nothing you have pinned needs
|
||||
re-pinning; there is a new field to add, not an old one to correct.**
|
||||
|
||||
| Field | `rotate` | `destroy` | `wrong-tenant` |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| `binding.submitted_request_digest` | `sha256:41c8fc08…` | `sha256:c605a9ec…` | `sha256:9aab6de9…` |
|
||||
|
||||
A consumer that pinned `request_digest` from these files was pinning a value it
|
||||
could not have computed itself — it matched because it was copied from our
|
||||
output, not derived. That is the defect `submitted_request_digest` closes: the
|
||||
same assertion now has a value you can recompute from the request you sent.
|
||||
|
||||
**Regenerated at `v2`, 2026-09-06.** The package gained the tenant rule it had
|
||||
been missing, so `provenance.policy_version` is now `v2` and
|
||||
`policy_package_digest` moved from `sha256:fe0070b7…bd8c` to
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -100,19 +100,21 @@
|
|||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
"request_digest": "sha256:c749ee2dc3cdf927a70a3e5b27cff4d97a438d3264153b4b2e3bcacbaf82091a",
|
||||
"approval_binding_digest": "sha256:fa07becfaa471394d06aee5fa3cd66352bf0cc69ef24900240489684cda8cd56"
|
||||
"approval_binding_digest": "sha256:fa07becfaa471394d06aee5fa3cd66352bf0cc69ef24900240489684cda8cd56",
|
||||
"submitted_request_digest": "sha256:c605a9ecd5711d0a1d59e7b29f3a16b53fd09d104dd077766f098e7bc5895435"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"lifetime": {
|
||||
"kind": "ttl",
|
||||
"ttl": "15m",
|
||||
"not_before": "2026-09-06T18:35:19Z",
|
||||
"expires_at": "2026-09-06T18:50:19Z"
|
||||
"not_before": "2026-09-07T07:10:23Z",
|
||||
"expires_at": "2026-09-07T07:25:23Z"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"diagnostics": {
|
||||
"action": "destroy",
|
||||
"matched_relationship": "",
|
||||
"policy_package": "secrets-engine.catalog-lane.lifecycle",
|
||||
"policy_status": "ready",
|
||||
"registry_overrode": [],
|
||||
"registry_resource": false,
|
||||
"registry_subject": true
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
|
@ -126,7 +128,7 @@
|
|||
"input_claim_digests": {
|
||||
"context": "sha256:8b73d29ecef286d42e03d2420531d6c45219f325a7ae004c1ecfc781203a2800"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"decision_time": "2026-09-06T18:35:19Z"
|
||||
"decision_time": "2026-09-07T07:10:23Z"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"caring": {
|
||||
"profile": "caring-0.4.0-rc2",
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -69,19 +69,21 @@
|
|||
"stage": "prod"
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
"request_digest": "sha256:de67324f54187055307a833235f83ced9fcd3a20952a27b3d19493ed39734345"
|
||||
"request_digest": "sha256:de67324f54187055307a833235f83ced9fcd3a20952a27b3d19493ed39734345",
|
||||
"submitted_request_digest": "sha256:41c8fc084e58c46554ccb6afe9943a99906e5986668c923811721f66d9b30a6a"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"lifetime": {
|
||||
"kind": "ttl",
|
||||
"ttl": "15m",
|
||||
"not_before": "2026-09-06T18:35:18Z",
|
||||
"expires_at": "2026-09-06T18:50:18Z"
|
||||
"not_before": "2026-09-07T07:10:23Z",
|
||||
"expires_at": "2026-09-07T07:25:23Z"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"diagnostics": {
|
||||
"action": "rotate",
|
||||
"matched_relationship": "",
|
||||
"policy_package": "secrets-engine.catalog-lane.lifecycle",
|
||||
"policy_status": "ready",
|
||||
"registry_overrode": [],
|
||||
"registry_resource": false,
|
||||
"registry_subject": true
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
|
@ -92,7 +94,7 @@
|
|||
"policy_version": "v2",
|
||||
"policy_package_digest": "sha256:bd11c5fe77ce6439c65fea225ad6b71d2110efc5e7b5bc9b499c59cd0a53b8b4",
|
||||
"registry_snapshot_digest": "sha256:f5a309bc0b36721fd6d9ad7f53eb21222162bc2eac62a0ab0802a9a1d51340bb",
|
||||
"decision_time": "2026-09-06T18:35:18Z"
|
||||
"decision_time": "2026-09-07T07:10:23Z"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"caring": {
|
||||
"profile": "caring-0.4.0-rc2",
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -69,13 +69,15 @@
|
|||
"stage": "prod"
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
"request_digest": "sha256:c9c6e6f8713266e9e95ae1443a395a3a1f965ba95469dea747645f0437bb0d20"
|
||||
"request_digest": "sha256:c9c6e6f8713266e9e95ae1443a395a3a1f965ba95469dea747645f0437bb0d20",
|
||||
"submitted_request_digest": "sha256:9aab6de9069e1e811a52835ca00bc5e9cb38166444df068eb60a26923b1c9175"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"diagnostics": {
|
||||
"action": "rotate",
|
||||
"matched_relationship": "",
|
||||
"policy_package": "secrets-engine.catalog-lane.lifecycle",
|
||||
"policy_status": "ready",
|
||||
"registry_overrode": [],
|
||||
"registry_resource": false,
|
||||
"registry_subject": true
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
|
@ -86,7 +88,7 @@
|
|||
"policy_version": "v2",
|
||||
"policy_package_digest": "sha256:bd11c5fe77ce6439c65fea225ad6b71d2110efc5e7b5bc9b499c59cd0a53b8b4",
|
||||
"registry_snapshot_digest": "sha256:f5a309bc0b36721fd6d9ad7f53eb21222162bc2eac62a0ab0802a9a1d51340bb",
|
||||
"decision_time": "2026-09-06T18:35:20Z"
|
||||
"decision_time": "2026-09-07T07:10:24Z"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"caring": {
|
||||
"profile": "caring-0.4.0-rc2",
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue