informed-decision/layer.yaml
tegwick f6376ddff5 Declare the layer per GH-DEC-2026-012; close T02
Gate House ruled all three questions within a day, attributing the speed to the
request being filed before the architecture with candidate answers and their
costs.

R1 PEP-shaped, confirmed as proposed. The ruling settles the shape; the layer
stays ours to declare, so layer.yaml is written in this repository's voice
rather than transcribed from the reply.

R2 yes to a presentation claim, no second catalog row, under three limits now
declared in layer.yaml and tested. Limit 2 — the claim must never be an input to
the decision it presents for — is load-bearing: our self-dealing argument was
accepted because it holds, not despite it. Limit 3 drives architecture, since
here the actor being audited and the evidence source are the same component.

R3 (b) with the authority rule: binding digest authoritative for what the
request is, view_hash only for what was shown, neither substitutable, and a
disagreement between them is a finding against the presenting surface rather
than a fact about the request. Linkage is co-reference; nesting was refused
because it reproduces the GH-DEC-2026-008 hash cycle.

Built to v0.8 obligation 3 rather than migrating later: axis enumerated, unknown
resolves to fail_closed, absent distinguishable from unknown in the record, and
published-equals-shipped asserted by test rather than claimed. Every stance is
fail_closed, which is a conclusion not a shortcut — ops-warden can justify
fail_open on a continuity argument that does not exist here.

GH-DEC-2026-010 inherited as a declared gap in four documents: a decision cannot
today be proven to have come from access-engine. The decision path must not be
described as validated while FLEX-WP-0024 is open.

46 tests pass. T05 and T07 unblocked.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01V3W1dQG7GFFM9d94jFx7iR

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1565372@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 16bb2f25-b34c-49ef-8e94-5fec3567a568
2026-09-09 22:25:35 +02:00

184 lines
7.9 KiB
YAML

# informed-decision — NetKingdom security layer declaration
#
# Framework: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.7.md
# Companion: net-kingdom/SECURITY-COMPANION.md v0.2
# Voice: INTENT.md (this repository's own, per §11 "who must declare")
# Ruling: GH-DEC-2026-012 (gate-house@0a1d1d9) answered INFD-IN-0001
#
# Reference form: ops-warden's, adopted by audit-core and kings-guard, with
# kings-guard's adaptation for a repository with no Tooling contacts.
#
# GH-DEC-2026-012 R1 confirmed the SHAPE. The layer is declared here, in this
# repository's own voice, because a layer someone else states about you is not
# a declaration.
schema_version: "0.1"
framework: netkingdom-security-layer-model
standard_version: "0.7"
companion_version: "0.2"
repository: informed-decision
layer: surface
role: pep-shaped
declared_by: INTENT.md
declared_at: "2026-09-09"
ruling: GH-DEC-2026-012
# §6.4 — informed-decision is PEP-shaped: it causes a protected side effect on
# the far side of a decision (recording an approver entry against an approval
# object). Companion §5 is owed and §6.4 applies in full.
#
# Built to v0.8 obligation 3, not v0.7, per GH-DEC-2026-011 — see pep-stance.yaml.
pep_stance: pep-stance.yaml
protected_action: "Approver entry recorded against an approval object (POST /v1/approvals/{id}/entries)"
decision_engine: access-engine
# §6 — no repository other than access-engine exposes an authorization decision.
# This surface renders a question and records a human's answer. A disposition is
# evidence of an act, never a verdict.
decision_surfaces_exposed: none
# §3.3 / GH-DEC-2026-012 R2 — YES to a presentation claim, and NO second catalog
# row: PEP and PIP are shapes a repository has; §4 records the layers it
# occupies. The permission carries three limits, and they are the substance of
# it rather than caveats on it.
presentation_claim:
emitted: true
carries: presentation-only
limits:
- id: L1-presentation-only
rule: >-
The claim carries presentation and nothing else. It MUST NOT carry,
restate, summarise or imply the decision, the verdict, or whether the
act was permitted. A consumer learns from it only what was SHOWN, never
what was DECIDED.
- id: L2-not-an-input
rule: >-
The claim MUST NOT be an input to the decision it presents for. A policy
reading view_hash to decide whether an act is permitted would let the
presenting surface contribute to its own authorization.
note: >-
Load-bearing, not a formality. GH-DEC-2026-012 accepted this
repository's argument that a renderer attesting its own rendering is not
the self-dealing that kept the approval object out of access-engine —
but only because this limit holds. Without it the two collapse into the
same failure.
- id: L3-independent-evidence-path
rule: >-
The evidence copy reaches audit-core INDEPENDENTLY of this repository.
The claim endpoint and the evidence path are different things and
neither substitutes for the other. The copy that is evidence MUST NOT be
reachable only through the party it is evidence about.
note: >-
The limit that matters most here: audit evidence is protected from the
actor being audited, and in this component the actor and the source are
the same. Architecture consequence, tracked in
docs/specs/ArchitectureBlueprint.md.
# §17 — the shared request-claim schema is still unowned. This repository
# publishes at its own boundary and yields to that schema when it exists.
# Position accepted by GH-DEC-2026-012 and matching approval-engine's in
# APPROVAL-IN-0001.
request_claim_schema:
status: unowned-upstream
local_shape: published-at-own-boundary
yields_to: taxonomy-request-claim-schema
# GH-DEC-2026-012 R3 — (b), with the authority rule written down.
binding_digest_relationship:
ruling: GH-DEC-2026-012
view_hash_authoritative_for: what-was-shown
binding_digest_authoritative_for: what-the-request-is
binding_digest_owner: approval-engine
substitutable: false
disagreement_is: >-
A finding against the presenting surface, never a fact about the request.
linkage: co-reference
linkage_rule: >-
The presentation record carries the approval or binding identifier
explicitly, and both attestations are read against that one reference. This
repository MUST NOT recompute or restate approval-engine's binding digest
from its own vocabulary — it references the digest that layer computed and
recorded.
nesting_forbidden: >-
view_hash MUST NOT contain the binding digest, and MUST NOT travel inside
hashed request material while containing it. Option (c) was refused because
nesting reproduces the hash cycle that made GH-DEC-2026-008 unimplementable:
a claim required to name the digest of a request that would come to contain
it, where a fail-closed consumer denies permanently.
# §5 applies to Staff. This is a browser-facing surface with no Tooling contact.
tooling_contacts: []
# §11 — record non-Tooling clients so the check is total.
non_tooling_clients: []
intended_non_tooling_clients:
- target: approval-engine
layer: engine
rationale: >-
GET /v1/approvals/{id} and /claim (approval:read) to render; POST
/v1/approvals/{id}/entries (approval:approve) to record a binding. Never
/consume. Requirements: approval-engine/docs/approver-surface-requirements.md.
- target: access-engine
layer: engine
rationale: >-
Decision consumed before rendering an approval to a person. A 200 from
approval-engine is not entitlement. This surface consumes a decision and
never renders one.
- target: key-cape
layer: engine
rationale: >-
Identity. Authorization-code + PKCE browser client. Identity is imported,
never invented here.
- target: audit-core
layer: engine
rationale: >-
Evidence destination for presentation records and dispositions. Must be an
independent path per limit L3-independent-evidence-path.
- target: state-hub
layer: not-catalogued
rationale: >-
Progress events. Outside §5 by the v0.5 scope rule. Recorded, not policed.
# §9.6 — presentation evidence is load-bearing: it is the only record of what a
# human was shown before binding. Atomicity and attestation cover accident and
# later tampering, never a compromised source.
evidence:
kind: load-bearing
residual: compromised-surface-presents-x-attests-y
residual_closed: false
custody: same-bound-as-every-other-source # §16 decided: no stronger archive
note: >-
GH-DEC-2026-012 states the residual is not closed in those words, and this
repository is not credited with closing it. Same disposition as
approval-engine's equivalent residual for adversarial omission at a
compromised source.
# INHERITED DECLARED GAP — GH-DEC-2026-010.
#
# Obligation 1 now requires a decision be ATTRIBUTABLE to access-engine. No
# consumer can satisfy that today: flex-auth's decision envelope is unsigned.
# This is a declared §13 gap tracked as FLEX-WP-0024, not a clean path this
# repository can walk.
#
# Stated here, and in SCOPE.md and ArchitectureBlueprint.md, because
# GH-DEC-2026-012 requires it be said in this repository's own documents rather
# than describing validation as complete.
inherited_gaps:
- id: GH-DEC-2026-010-attributability
obligation: 1
gap: >-
A decision consumed from access-engine cannot today be proven to have come
from access-engine — the envelope is unsigned.
tracked_by: FLEX-WP-0024
consequence_here: >-
This surface's record can show that a decision was obtained and what it
said. It cannot yet show it was access-engine that said it. Validation of
the decision path MUST NOT be described as complete while this is open.
status: open
declared_shapes:
"5.1": []
"5.2": []
"5.3": []