From e3fffe3ab4a353dd6bb4fd40a0c06f058c8aabe2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: tegwick Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2026 03:29:45 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Review bounded Staff evidence doctrine without changing accepted canon Assistant: codex Assistant-Model: gpt-6.1-sol Assistant-Session: 01a126e1-76f8-7643-8cf3-e93336539ade --- ...0-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.md | 109 ++++++++++++++++++ ...-evidence-source-owner-review.sources.json | 57 +++++++++ workplans/ADHOC-2026-10-11.md | 31 +++++ 3 files changed, 197 insertions(+) create mode 100644 docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.md create mode 100644 docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.sources.json create mode 100644 workplans/ADHOC-2026-10-11.md diff --git a/docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.md b/docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..41e919a --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.md @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@ +# NetKingdom source-owner review — Staff presentation evidence disposition + +```yaml +reviewer: net-kingdom-owner (agent net-kingdom, codex) +decision: approved +reviewed_at: "2026-10-11" +work_item: NK-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-11-T01 +proposal: GH-WP-0004-T06-r1 +source_repo: gate-house +source_commit: f5e9365 +source_path: docs/amendments/informed-decision-staff-evidence-disposition-proposal.md +source_sha256: 08bc78a29c2b67cec0aafba993fb2d25312b629ecccb81458980baafe38e566a +governing_canon_sha256: 3d8298560069ef471fba28d2b1245fb2309328f231dad1a667cdf0ce5a5a7c8b +comment: >- + NetKingdom INTENT declares Taxonomy, canon ownership/publication and explicit + provider boundaries. This exact proposed disposition honestly carries the + unresolved section3.4 fit while preserving Staff/PEP shape, the sole PDP, + approval ownership and per-class load-bearing obligations. Technical source + compatibility approved under NK-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-11-T01 for separate founder + doctrine disposition and a proposed successor publication. This review does + not accept any standard, authorize native publication or decide another + owner's implementation conformance. +``` + +## Responsibility and exact compatibility + +NetKingdom publishes security semantics and does not redefine service internals, +act as the PDP or write the founder's disposition. The requested Staff row is +supported by informed-decision/docs/section-4-catalog-row.md's affirmative request; +it is not unasked enrolment. Existing accepted v0.8 §3.4 is genuinely absolute: +non-deterministic Staff may not hold state another layer uses at runtime. +The candidate states the tension instead of silently redefining state as +"authoritative state", marking a fifth layer or scoring it resolved. + +GH012 R1 and GH017 §3 preserve Staff/PEP-shaped rather than Engine or surface +as a layer. GH021's explicit open-item clause permits the model's own voice to +amend §3.4 or state a carried tension, and couples that answer to the requested +catalogue row; this candidate takes the latter path. It does not reopen the +completed §11 hold or make v0.8 acceptance wait on T06. + +The proposed row and evidence source yes put this specific repository inside +catalogue scope and mark an emitter, not its audit custodian. Neither is a +claim of conformance. The replacement values clause keeps yes/no/unassessed, +audit-core no and other rows unassessed, consistent with GH024. Its reporting +requirements distinguish the unresolved Staff fit, the emitter's owed/not-declared +guarantee and a passing declaration/pin detector. None disappears because the +other passes. No whole-estate or whole-repository PASS follows from a layer value. + +Candidate D follows the actual owner event inventory: presentation is load-bearing +volume, disposition and stance-application are load-bearing rare. It retains +positive window/minimum and reconciliation for volume, heartbeat AND reconciliation +for rare, and preserves the duty to return actual verified guarantees. Current +source declaration records owed/not-yet-declarable; this review inspected that +source, not operational drain/cadence. Existing §11's outbox atomicity and explicit +completeness non-claim still apply unchanged; the new row does not supply them. +The guarantee remains owed separately from §3.4's structural tension. + +GH012 R2's three limits remain binding: presentation claims cannot carry/restate/ +summarise/imply authorization or approval verdicts, cannot authorize their own +presented act, and require an independent audit evidence path. Candidate A retains +those boundaries and explicitly references limit3. View_hash and approval binding +remain non-substitutable; this is not a repeal of later GH015's separately conditioned +nesting rule. Neither approval current-state, validity or consumption moves from +approval-engine. The extra presentation evidence does not create a second PDP. + +GH014 commitment-only availability/reconstructability limits and the compromised +surface residual stay visible. A real bind or emitted commitment does not establish +faithful display/completeness; GH024's refused failure-path release is not smuggled +in as a carried tension. No permission to omit load-bearing events or proceed when +mandatory local evidence cannot be made is granted. PolicyNexus publishing the +future accepted doctrine is delivery, not authorization or operational proof. + +## Exact source/paperwork checks + +Accepted v0.8 remains byte-for-byte SHA2563d829856... and the companion v0.3 +points to it. The proposal and unsigned memo packet match SHA25608bc78a29... +Memo sealed=false, approval_id=null and approval_binding_digest=null; none is +an authenticated human disposition. Its review request is bounded to the exact +successor proposal, not ratification of a new model version or deployment. + +All retained source pins match current source except the GateHouse workplan pin. +That pin is the pre-proposal snapshot: git show f5e9365^:workplans/GH-WP-0004-section-11-layer-declarations.md +hashes to the recorded debd0499... value. f5e9365 subsequently appends this proposal +and changes T06 todo to progress; later consistency writes do not alter the +proposal digest. Treat that pin as a historical read snapshot, not a false claim +that current workplan bytes match. The adjacent review sources JSON retains both +historical and current provenance; no refresh of the reviewed proposal is needed. + +Emergent Security orientation0.2.6/start digest8d1d6a9d... was withheld for changed +sources; current local INTENT/canon/companion/doctrine/owner evidence documents +were read directly. Orientation supplies no publication authority. + +## Required follow-through after this technical review + +No textual correction is required for technical compatibility of this r1 proposal. +Founder disposition must name its exact digest. Accepted v0.8 is not overwritten; +any successor proposal/cut keeps history and its own reviewed revision. Publish +only after the actual authority and source-review requirements are met, preserving +all other clauses and the independent Staff-tension/emission report findings. +InformedDecision owns its declaration/runtime guarantees; AuditCore owns custody; +GateHouse owns doctrine disposition; NetKingdom publishes; PolicyNexus serves the +accepted reviewed revision. This review signs for NetKingdom only. + +GH-WP-0004-T06 and INFD-IN-0007 are not marked done by this review. Answering the +intake as carried tension requires the accepted standard's voice actually to say +it; that future answer does not remove the recorded conformance tension or complete +emission work. No native read, login, evidence emission, credential or policy change +was performed. Verification here is exact-byte source/memo/reference comparison; +no implementation test or runtime conformance result is manufactured. diff --git a/docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.sources.json b/docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.sources.json new file mode 100644 index 0000000..e52e947 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/reviews/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-source-owner-review.sources.json @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +{ + "proposal_sha256": "08bc78a29c2b67cec0aafba993fb2d25312b629ecccb81458980baafe38e566a", + "work_item": "NK-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-11-T01", + "references": [ + { + "path": "/home/worsch/gate-house/docs/amendments/informed-decision-staff-evidence-disposition-proposal.md", + "sha256": "08bc78a29c2b67cec0aafba993fb2d25312b629ecccb81458980baafe38e566a" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/gate-house/docs/amendments/informed-decision-staff-evidence-sources.json", + "sha256": "e2d109b1e49b2fbcebe5d4e2b70e61a485020d47bd96c2af868ea7ae7a535323" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/gate-house/docs/decision-memos/2026-10-11-staff-evidence-tension.memo.json", + "sha256": "65e1c776c97da9cb85d4794faeba2f6dea0ca74b06a2df471950954bd84f1a46" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/gate-house/decisions/decisions.md", + "sha256": "7c0d582448a9f4f39a438a24300a487259241d32616c2a6da16f8e5c52eb2425" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/net-kingdom/INTENT.md", + "sha256": "fd2ba8dff9dfd5583ec6d8b0348f273bfe00c59923b5d5d47cd22b1fb4658c54" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.8.md", + "sha256": "3d8298560069ef471fba28d2b1245fb2309328f231dad1a667cdf0ce5a5a7c8b" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/net-kingdom/SECURITY-COMPANION.md", + "sha256": "06374445ca888549f1bf79527d1345d94918d7a7ec363160d8427d0e7a31d643" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/informed-decision/INTENT.md", + "sha256": "6fb7ef530728e51edfd10e233fd11580fbb9283c5cbc38f6d460c954818031f5" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/informed-decision/docs/section-4-catalog-row.md", + "sha256": "efe98a35ac94e26c4478f67a54abaf22543ad0ab715e69ffd2f66c985b206484" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/informed-decision/docs/evidence-path-design.md", + "sha256": "ec2de83949839e551a4807e85dd5f9c39978bde41ce26454b3d5e260803a27d0" + }, + { + "path": "/home/worsch/informed-decision/layer.yaml", + "sha256": "76c20143944a97852ccde8392330d3bb8084a4921ab15e2cb86f10ad75caaf2d" + } + ], + "historical_workplan_pin": { + "source": "gate-house@f5e9365^:workplans/GH-WP-0004-section-11-layer-declarations.md", + "sha256": "debd049989b27c89bf2a0b19be27f84aa9da6bb167b3e02133c752bdc4a16eac" + }, + "current_workplan_sha256": "c03b6d34e630eaa1064222ec6208f064832f49950e318fb8858a2273bdb63446", + "human_disposition_recorded": false, + "native_publication_performed": false +} diff --git a/workplans/ADHOC-2026-10-11.md b/workplans/ADHOC-2026-10-11.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..1d7365c --- /dev/null +++ b/workplans/ADHOC-2026-10-11.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +--- +id: NK-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-11 +type: workplan +title: "Review the proposed Staff presentation evidence disposition" +domain: infotech +repo: net-kingdom +status: finished +flavor: planning +owner: codex +topic_slug: netkingdom +created: "2026-10-11" +updated: "2026-10-11" +related: [GH-WP-0004] +--- + +## Review exact requested successor-canon amendment without publication + +```task +id: NK-WP-ADHOC-2026-10-11-T01 +status: done +priority: medium +``` + +Source-owner review only of GH-WP-0004-T06-r1, exact proposal SHA256 +08bc78a29c2b67cec0aafba993fb2d25312b629ecccb81458980baafe38e566a. +Reviewed against NetKingdom INTENT, accepted v0.8, current working companion, +GH012/014/017/021/024 and InformedDecision's requested row/event inventory. +Approved technical compatibility for separate founder disposition and proposed +successor publication review; no standard/case acceptance, founder decision, +live publication, runtime conformance or completion of GH-WP-0004-T06/INFD-IN-0007 +is asserted. Review and exact sources are retained in docs/reviews/.