diff --git a/canon/standards/tenancy-posture_v0.1.md b/canon/standards/tenancy-posture_v0.1.md
index 8adf77e..bfae362 100644
--- a/canon/standards/tenancy-posture_v0.1.md
+++ b/canon/standards/tenancy-posture_v0.1.md
@@ -785,10 +785,19 @@ minimum-level vocabulary alongside isolation.
    right to decline it as fleet-scope work; the answer was a home of its own
    rather than a volunteer.
 
-   Independence is the design point, and it bears on this document: a facility
-   verifying conformance to this framework is deliberately **not** owned by
-   NetKingdom, which owns the framework. Self-grading one level up is still
-   self-grading.
+   **Owned by NetKingdom** — corrected 2026-08-17; an earlier revision of this
+   section proposed otherwise on independence grounds and was overruled.
+   Offensive security is security work and belongs with the repo that owns
+   security. The facility is framed offensively rather than as a conformance
+   checker: it is pointed at infrastructure we choose, our own estate among
+   them, and conformance testing is one use of a general capability.
+
+   The residual tension is recorded rather than resolved: NetKingdom owns this
+   framework *and* the facility that tests conformance to it, so those findings
+   are NetKingdom assessing NetKingdom. The mitigation is that findings leave
+   for `risk-nexus`, under `the-custodian`, rather than being closed in place.
+   Proportionate, not perfect. Revisit if conformance findings start getting
+   quietly closed.
 
    Two consequences land back here. **Cadence is now a security parameter, not
    a schedule** — for any control whose guarantee is detection rather than