key-cape/docs/tenant-claim-contract.md
tegwick 7a6666d1f9
All checks were successful
Build and Publish Container Image / build-and-push (push) Successful in 33s
Align approval registrations to the tenant:platform decision
Operator decision 5ed3fb35-eca9-413a-82b9-95171ba85bf6 accepts tenant:platform
as the platform management tenant for the Glas approval chain, requiring exact
spelling across the approval store, the service-client JWT claim and the
lifecycle CheckRequest.

Changes the tenant field on secrets-engine-approval and approval-engine-operator
only, in the registration fixture and the provisioning packet. Unrelated clients
and the human directory default keep tenant:coulomb, and no audience, scope,
subject, role, lifetime or MFA grant changes.

Adds issuance evidence that the approval shape emits tenant:platform exactly and
never an alias the caller requests, that the OpenBao client gains no
cross-tenant reach, and a fixture guard pinning every reviewed client's tenant.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NV9oijZukGyGbRQGGKnK4P

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 713576@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 384c511d-9bce-4cb8-a676-2aef6c0c8df6
2026-09-06 22:30:32 +02:00

89 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown

# Tenant claim contract
States what KeyCape owns and emits for the `tenant` claim. Raised by glas-harness
message `356f6977-d361-4e3b-83ab-b2c7f4759286` (GLAS-WP-0015) and resolved by
operator decision `5ed3fb35-eca9-413a-82b9-95171ba85bf6` — "Use tenant:platform
for the Glas approval dependency chain", recorded in
`glas-harness/docs/platform-tenant-decision.md`.
`tenant:platform` is the platform management, administration and services tenant
(the landlord zone). KeyCape emits it verbatim for the two approval clients and
still creates no mapping between tenant vocabularies: no alias to `platform` or
`tenant:coulomb`, and no implicit cross-tenant grant.
## What KeyCape emits
The `tenant` claim is bound at registration or directory-resolution time and is
never influenced by request parameters.
| Principal | Source of `tenant` | Value in the reviewed registrations |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Service (`client_credentials`) | The client's `tenant` field. Required by config validation — a `client_credentials` client without `serviceSubject` and `tenant` fails startup validation. | In `config/service-clients.example.yaml`: `tenant:platform` for `secrets-engine-approval` and `approval-engine-operator`; `tenant:coulomb` for `codex-railiance-platform` and `secrets-engine-openbao`. |
| Human (`authorization_code`) | The directory user's tenant, falling back to the platform default when unset. | Directory value, else `tenant:coulomb`. |
`tenant`, `tenant_hint`, `audience` and `resource` request parameters cannot
change the claim. `tenant_hint` on `/authorize` reaches registration/enrollment
handoffs only; it is not a claim input.
## The approval chain, after the decision
All three layers now use one exact spelling, `tenant:platform`:
| Layer | Value | Owner |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Approval store tenant | `tenant:platform` | approval-engine |
| Service-client JWT `tenant` claim | `tenant:platform` | KeyCape (this repo) |
| Lifecycle CheckRequest tenant | `tenant:platform` | flex-auth |
KeyCape performs **no** normalization, prefix-stripping or aliasing, so a
resource server compares `tenant` as an exact string. The previously observed
`platform` and `tenant:coulomb` spellings are **not** accepted aliases for
`tenant:platform`; a token carrying either must be denied by the resource server.
## Scope of the alignment
The decision changed the `tenant` field on exactly two registrations,
`secrets-engine-approval` and `approval-engine-operator`, plus the matching
entries in `docs/approval-engine-provisioning-request.yaml`. Deliberately
unchanged:
- `codex-railiance-platform` and `secrets-engine-openbao` keep `tenant:coulomb`.
- Human directory resolution keeps its `tenant:coulomb` default.
- No cross-tenant grant is implied: a `tenant:platform` token conveys no reach
into `tenant:coulomb` resources, and audiences, scopes, subjects, roles,
lifetimes and MFA requirements are untouched.
This resolves the *choice* of tenant only. Live provisioning of the two clients
remains gated on deployment-owned custody and the separate verification gates in
KEY-WP-0013-T02; KeyCape changed no live registration or policy subject.
## Evidence
`src/internal/server/oidc/tenant_test.go`:
- `TestServiceTenantIsBoundToRegistrationAndIgnoresRequestParameters` — a request
supplying `tenant=tenant:platform` and `tenant_hint=platform` still yields the
registered `tenant`, signature-verified against `/jwks`.
- `TestServiceTenantsAreDistinctPerRegistration` — two registrations with
different tenants yield their own values and never each other's; this is the
wrong-tenant denial basis for an exact-comparison resource server.
- `TestHumanTenantClaimUsesDirectoryValueThenPlatformDefault` — human tokens carry
the directory tenant, defaulting to `tenant:coulomb` rather than an empty claim.
- `TestApprovalClientIssuesExactPlatformTenantAndRejectsAliases` — the
approval-client shape issues `tenant:platform` exactly, with
`aud=approval-engine`, even when the caller asks for `platform`,
`tenant:coulomb` or `TENANT:PLATFORM`.
- `TestUnrelatedServiceClientKeepsCoulombTenant` — the OpenBao login client keeps
`tenant:coulomb` even when the request asks for `tenant:platform`, so the
alignment grants no cross-tenant reach.
`src/cmd/keycape/clients_test.go`:
- `TestServiceRegistrationTenantsAreExactPerDecision` — loads the real
registration fixture and pins the exact tenant of every reviewed client, so
drift or an alias reintroduced into `config/service-clients.example.yaml` fails
the build.
These are local issuance proofs. They are not live-rollout evidence; see
`docs/approval-engine-auth-contract.md` and KEY-WP-0013-T02 for the deployment
boundary. No token or secret values appear in this document or in test output.