The role set — Principal, effective actor, Delegator, tool or agent, policy
ceiling, execution context, audit identity — now applies wherever a subject's
access is exercised through another party, rather than to non-human subjects
only.
The gap this closes is not about agents. A support operator impersonating a
customer involves no non-human subject anywhere in the path, yet without the
decomposition that operator's audit identity and policy ceiling collapse into
the customer's, which is the outcome CARING's exposure analysis exists to
prevent. CARING already names customer impersonation as an exposure mode and
ImpersonationBlocked as a control; the vocabulary for analysing it was gated to
subjects the case does not involve. Section 33 was already subject-agnostic, so
the canon applied the execution paths to any subject while restricting the roles
along those paths to non-human ones — an artifact of the section heading, not a
considered position.
Accepted narrowly. Section 32.1 stays agent-stated, with a note on reading the
capability ceiling for a human effective actor. No role is removed, renamed or
added, and section 33 is untouched. Option C, a twelfth dimension, is rejected as
duplicating sections 32 and 33 while touching a dimension set the Kubernetes RBAC
benchmark depends on.
Canon version moves to 0.4.0-RC2-itc2; source version stays 0.4.0-RC2, since
this revises the InfoTechCanon-aligned standard and claims nothing about
upstream CARING. The change is additive: an implementation that applied the set
only to non-human subjects stays conformant for those subjects.
Review record in history/; the SecurityCanon boundary file and placement record
are updated to show R-2 resolved.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 3588@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 24b80f66-e5a7-4e61-99fe-2d422e6d17da
R-3 is resolved by disambiguation without a rename. CARING section 10.7 now says
its Authority exposure mode names a demanding party rather than a right, links to
ITC-ORG section 10.17, and notes that such an Authority holds no organizational
authority over the system it compels. ITC-ORG carries the reciprocal sentence and
records that SecurityCanon's AuthMode qualifies the exercise of the right rather
than redefining it.
The seventeen concepts no artifact declared are now declared: eleven to the
Organization Model, four to CARING and two to the Capability Model. Capacity in
the Organization Model and Capacity behaviour in the Capability Model are two
concepts, not one, and neither moves. Two of CARING's four turned out not to be
new concepts at all but the prose spellings of CaringCapabilityProfile and
CaringDerivedCapability; both spellings are declared to the same owner so the
name a reader meets resolves. Effective Access and Declared Access were
genuinely undeclared.
Three boundary reviews are added for organization, caring and capability,
bringing the count to fourteen. The concept_defined_without_owner warning is at
zero, and the test that asserted it fires now proves it on a modified corpus
instead of on the live one.
make check passes with 54 tests, clean validation, no warnings, no stale assets.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 3588@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 24b80f66-e5a7-4e61-99fe-2d422e6d17da
Twelve of the thirteen artifacts that declared nothing now declare what they
define, together with the map-assigned concepts the Organization Model was
missing and the Landscape seed concepts the extractor cannot see because they
are listed rather than defined in prose. The ownership index grows from 164
entries to 750, undeclared prose definitions fall from 637 to 57, and there are
no ownership conflicts. The 57 that remain are overlaps this round assigned to
another owner: imports, each recorded in a boundary review.
The kernel map declares nothing, deliberately, because it assigns concepts to
owners rather than defining them. It is now the only silent artifact and the
suite asserts that, so an artifact added without declarations fails.
itc-org:Authority is declared, with Actor, Ownership, Membership, Role,
Responsibility and Accountability, which SecurityCanon and the identity model
already treat as organization-owned. The regression test that previously
asserted the blind spot now asserts that the kernel map's assignment and the
declaration agree.
Profile is deliberately left undeclared. The kernel map assigns it to Core, the
identity model owns it under accepted CUST-ADR-006, and Observability defines a
runtime performance profile. Three senses need a decision, not a declaration, so
it is recorded as open rather than forced.
Eleven boundary reviews are added beside the artifacts they describe, in the
shape the identity model has used since INFO-WP-0021. The largest finding is
that Core and the Information Space model restate eight provenance concepts in
nearly identical words; Core owns them and Information Space imports. Label,
Drift, Summary and Attribute are resolved by disambiguation rather than
transfer.
make check passes with 50 tests, clean validation, no stale generated assets.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 3588@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 24b80f66-e5a7-4e61-99fe-2d422e6d17da
The SecurityCanon boundary review recorded a residual: CARING and ITC-ACCESS
hold two definitions of Scope, with ITC-ACCESS named owner. Reading the corpus
corrects both halves. ITC-IDENT section 2.10 owns Scope as the general boundary
within which identifiers, meanings, relationships, accounts, policies or
lifecycle states are valid, and ITC-ACCESS section 11.8 ResourceScope already
declares itself a refinement of that general identity Scope rather than a
competing definition.
The second use the residual was reaching for is CARING section 21, which
presented a dimension named Scope with a ladder from Ecosystem to Field without
saying what the dimension ranges over. It now states that it ranges over
ITC-IDENT Scope instances, that the ladder is the canonical value set rather
than a second definition, and that ResourceScope refines the same concept for
resource boundaries.
No concept is renamed, moved or removed and no ladder value changes, so the
corpus is unchanged in shape; make check passes with 46 tests, clean validation
and a passing small-saas profile. The correction is carried back to the
SecurityCanon placement record and imports.json, where Scope now imports from
the identity model.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 3588@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 24b80f66-e5a7-4e61-99fe-2d422e6d17da
Register the InfoTechCanon Repository Layout Standard as a domain standard
(itc-repo-layout), processed from demand through the canon's Purpose/Demand
intake without collapsing existing model concepts.
- Register standard in artifacts/index.yaml, canon.yaml, infospace.yaml;
regenerate indexes, views, briefs, tree, and validation (validate green).
- T04: add reconciliation.yaml (partial/as-is dogfooding, declared core
conformance, recorded tensions); resolve the demand by moving it out of
demand/ to the evaluation pack as source-demand.md and removing demand/.
- T05: add consumer-adoption-brief.md for downstream repos.
- Update test artifact/standard counts (60->61, standards 2->3).
- Mark T03/T04/T05 done; workplan and registry status -> finished.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
