Admitting list is sound in principle — browsing your own outcomes should not need binding-grade freshness — and holds independent of the KeyCape stale-MFA defect that exposed it. read is not loosened to work around that defect. Verified that the v2 sitting rule scopes by exact-record pinning, group and fresh MFA, and does not check recipient. Option (A) would drop both PDP-side scopes for list at once and rest the allow on a consumer check the consumer itself says is not an entitlement. Recommends (B). Scope and freshness bound are left to the operator, by the precedent of FLEX-WP-0027/0028. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Assistant: claude-code Assistant-Model: opus Assistant-Process: 28468@bnt-lap001 Assistant-Session: c76569b2-6056-4dad-aea4-49cd7a018f5d
5.1 KiB
| id | type | title | domain | repo | status | flavor | owner | topic_slug | planning_priority | planning_order | related_workplans | created | updated | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FLEX-WP-0032 | workplan | Admit a list action for the informed-decision overview without handing the scope to the consumer | infotech | flex-auth | proposed | implementation | claude | netkingdom | P1 | 320 |
|
2026-09-21 | 2026-09-21 |
FLEX-WP-0032 — list for the informed-decision decision overview
Opened from informed-decision intake INFD-IN-0008 (INFD-WP-0004-T02), hub
message a7b9ef3b-f95c-4c50-bfc5-7628d16881f6. Full request:
informed-decision/docs/flex-auth-request-list-action.md @ 98c8de0.
What is asked
A new action, list, on decision-memo resources of system
informed-decision: the same identity bar as read minus the 900-second MFA
freshness window, over the memos of both admitted packages, shipped as v3
of informed-decision.compact-sitting. A list allow shows only memo id,
version and question, the live approval status, and the person's own responses.
It never shows brief or packet and never enables an act. read and every act
stay as in v2.
Why the request is sound in principle
Looking back at your own outcomes is a different act from binding a new one, and
should not need binding-grade freshness. That holds on its own, independent of
the KeyCape defect that exposed it (INFD-IN-0005: KeyCape copies the previous
session's MFA timestamp even after an actual MFA, so at understates freshness).
The bug is key-cape's to fix; read is not loosened to work around it.
Loosening a binding bar to compensate for a claim defect would be the PDP
silently absorbing an identity-layer fault.
What the PDP checks today — verified
The v2 sitting rule (examples/informed-decision-sitting/policy.md:76) scopes a
decision with three things: exact-record pinning (memo id → approval id and
binding digest), group net-kingdom-admins, and fresh AAL2 MFA. It does not
check that the memo is addressed to the subject. Recipient scoping today comes
from the operator's admission and the consumer's structural match.
The two scope options
- (A) resource-type-wide. Any
decision-memoofinformed-decisionintenant:platform. Removes exact-record pinning forlist— and together with the dropped freshness window, removes both PDP-side scopes at once. The only thing between a group member and every memo's question and status would be consumer code; flex-auth would recordallowfor memos never admitted by anyone and not addressed to the subject. The consumer's own document says its structural match "is not an entitlement". A PDP cannot rest an allow on a check the consumer disclaims. - (B) exact-record union. The eight sitting records plus the three T03 records, pinned by approval id and binding digest as today. The PDP keeps its own scope. Costs a package version per sitting — which is the property, not the cost: a new memo becomes listable when someone admitted it.
Recommendation: (B).
Open decisions (operator)
- Scope — (A) or (B). Recommended (B), for the reason above.
- Freshness for
list— unbounded as asked, a longer bounded window, or decline. Unbounded means an MFA of any age satisfieslistas long as the consumer presents a key-cape session; the PDP would state no bound at all.
Both are operator decisions by precedent: the reviewer identity bar on this
surface was admitted by the operator (FLEX-WP-0027-T01, FLEX-WP-0028).
1. Record the decision
id: FLEX-WP-0032-T01
status: wait
priority: high
Owner: operator decides; flex-auth records as a FLEX-DEC.
2. Compile compact-sitting v3
id: FLEX-WP-0032-T02
status: todo
priority: high
Owner: flex-auth.
- New
listrule;readand all five acts byte-identical in effect to v2. - Under (B), per-record
memo_version: the three T03 records are at version 2 (f85479c), the sitting records at 1. The v2 rule's globalmemo_version == 1cannot be reused for the union. listnever satisfies any act: a separate rule, not an extra action in the existing allow set.- A version bump, per
FLEX-DEC-2026-008: a widened bar must be visible to the consumer as a version change.
3. Fixtures and the exercise receipt
id: FLEX-WP-0032-T03
status: todo
priority: high
Owner: flex-auth, with informed-decision's fixtures.
At minimum: stale MFA allowed for list, refused for read; no group refused;
agent refused; principal_type_source other than authentication-derived
refused; under (B), an unlisted memo refused and each T03 record listable at
version 2 only. Every v2 check must still pass unchanged — the existing 147
sitting checks and T03's 57.
Gate: flex-auth validate, test-policy, and the exercise scripts green; a
receipt in docs/evidence/.
4. Publish and hand back
id: FLEX-WP-0032-T04
status: todo
priority: medium
Owner: flex-auth publishes the package, version and digest; informed-decision
updates its admission input. Deploying the pin is a production change to a
live human-review surface and is confirmed with the operator before it runs.