Compare commits

...

2 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
df2873ce54 Add NK-WP-0045: machine-readable custody record for the root grant
Some checks are pending
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Waiting to run
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Waiting to run
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: sonnet
Assistant-Process: 6969@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: e8ae73f2-8385-4c9c-b714-94c3c52cdbc0
2026-09-29 23:00:04 +02:00
cf0bd0da20 Propose ADR-0017: root-grant custody, tenant:platform mapping, observation evidence
Answers user-engine's USER-WP-0037-T02 request; custody doc points to it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: sonnet
Assistant-Process: 6969@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: e8ae73f2-8385-4c9c-b714-94c3c52cdbc0
2026-09-29 22:59:23 +02:00
3 changed files with 213 additions and 0 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
---
id: NK-ADR-0017
type: architecture-decision-record
title: "The Root Grant Is Derived From the Custody Record, Scoped to tenant:platform, and Observed as Non-Secret Evidence"
status: proposed
owner: net-kingdom
revision: "1"
decided: "2026-09-29"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-29"
review_interval: 12m
---
# ADR-0017 - Root-Grant Custody and Account Authority
**Status:** Proposed (drafted on the defaults agreed with the operator; accept after user-engine review)
**Date:** 2026-09-29
**Deciders:** Bernd Worsch, Claude
## Context
user-engine implemented `account.authority.read` (USER-WP-0037-T01) and a
workload-authenticated lookup endpoint. It will not derive
`AccountAuthority.root-grant` from JWT roles, a username, or a consumer's
configured root subject, and USER-WP-0037-T02 is blocked on NetKingdom
specifying the authority. `docs/platform-root-custody.md` covers custody of the
platform-root credential and OpenBao material, but not how a workload-facing
"subject X holds the root grant" fact is derived, revoked, or evidenced.
## Decision
### 1. Authority: the custody record; directory membership is a projection
The **platform-root custody record** (the non-secret ceremony record: custodian
assignment, quorum plan, root-token disposition, signoff) is the single
authority for who holds the root grant.
- A root grant exists for a subject only while a custody record names that
`(issuer, subject)` as king/platform-root custodian and no later record
revokes it.
- LLDAP `platform-root` membership and IAM claims (`groups: platform-root`,
`roles: platform-root-custodian`) are **projections** of the record. They are
authentication facts and MUST NOT be used alone to derive a root grant.
- **Revocation** is a recorded custody action: a new record entry that
supersedes the grant, with actor, reason, and time. Revocation must not
remove recovery authority (break-glass under king custody stays intact).
- If the record and a projection disagree, the record wins and the mismatch is
a posture finding, not a grant.
### 2. Mapping: `platform:root` grants `tenant:platform` only
- A root grant is expressed as relation `platform-root-custodian` in tenant
context `tenant:platform`. It is scoped to the platform control plane.
- It is never inherited by, or implied for, any other tenant, and tenant admin
authority never implies it (consistent with the user-engine boundary
contract and IAM Profile v0.3).
- The grant is a distinct grant type in the membership envelope
(`scope_type: tenant`, `scope_id: platform`, `relation:
platform-root-custodian`, `owner_system: net-kingdom-custody`). Consumers
such as the Hub read it from user-engine; they do not mint it.
### 3. Evidence: non-secret observations with explicit freshness
An account/entitlement observation retained by a consumer contains only:
`subject` (`issuer`, `subject`), `grant`, `source` (custody record id and
revision), `observed_at`, and `revoked_at` or `expires_at` when known. It never
contains tokens, keys, unseal shares, recovery codes, or reset links.
- Observations are read models: they carry `observed_at` and are re-derived from
the custody record rather than treated as durable truth.
- A consumer MAY cache an observation for at most **15 minutes**; sensitive
platform actions (root-grant-dependent writes) MUST re-check and fail closed
when the record cannot be read or the observation is stale.
- Revocation takes effect at the next re-check; the cache bound is the maximum
revocation latency.
## Consequences
- user-engine can represent `AccountAuthority.root-grant` deterministically from
the custody record id and revision, and unblocks USER-WP-0037-T02.
- The custody record needs a machine-readable, non-secret form that a workload
can read. Its shape and location are an open follow-up (below); until it
exists, user-engine returns "no root grant" rather than inferring one.
- The 15-minute bound and the projection-versus-record rule are decisions of
this ADR and may be tightened at review.
## Open follow-ups
- Define the machine-readable custody-record schema and read surface (owner:
net-kingdom; delivery of the read path may involve railiance-platform).
- Confirm with user-engine that the membership-envelope mapping above is
sufficient for `AccountAuthority`.

View file

@ -305,6 +305,21 @@ admin for `tenant:coulomb` or another tenant must not imply OpenBao root,
NetKingdom identity-admin, flex-auth platform-policy, or Railiance
platform-service authority.
## Root Grant as a Workload-Facing Fact
Consumers such as the Hub and user-engine need to know whether a subject holds
the root grant. That fact is derived from the custody record, not from claims.
See [ADR-0017](adr/ADR-0017-root-grant-custody-and-account-authority.md):
- the custody record is the authority; LLDAP membership and the claims above are
projections and never sufficient alone;
- revocation is a recorded custody action that does not remove recovery
authority;
- the grant is `platform-root-custodian` in `tenant:platform` only, and never
implied by tenant admin; and
- retained observations are non-secret, carry `observed_at`, may be cached for at
most 15 minutes, and fail closed for root-dependent writes when stale.
## OpenBao Bootstrap Sequence
The Railiance OpenBao runbook owns the live commands. NetKingdom owns the

View file

@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
---
id: NK-WP-0045
type: workplan
title: "Make the platform-root custody record readable as a non-secret root-grant fact"
domain: infotech
repo: net-kingdom
status: proposed
flavor: implementation
owner: claude-code
topic_slug: netkingdom
created: "2026-09-29"
updated: "2026-09-29"
related: [NK-ADR-0017, NK-WP-0042]
---
NK-ADR-0017 makes the platform-root custody record the authority for the root
grant, but the record has no machine-readable, non-secret form a workload can
read. Until it does, user-engine returns "no root grant" and USER-WP-0037-T02
stays blocked. This workplan defines that form and its read surface. It does
not change custody itself, and no secret material enters the record.
## Accept ADR-0017
```task
id: NK-WP-0045-T01
status: wait
needs_human: true
blocking_reason: "Bernd accepts or amends NK-ADR-0017 (proposed) after user-engine confirms the AccountAuthority mapping."
priority: high
```
Resolve the open points (15-minute cache bound, envelope mapping) and move the
ADR to `accepted`.
## Define the custody-record schema
```task
id: NK-WP-0045-T02
status: todo
depends_on: [NK-WP-0045-T01]
priority: high
```
Add `canon/schemas/custody-record_v0.1.schema.json`: record id and revision,
`(issuer, subject)`, relation `platform-root-custodian`, `tenant:platform`,
granted-at, superseded-by, revoked-at with actor and reason. Non-secret only;
the schema rejects token, key, share and recovery-code fields.
## Add a validator and fixtures
```task
id: NK-WP-0045-T03
status: todo
depends_on: [NK-WP-0045-T02]
priority: medium
```
Validator with grant, revocation and supersession fixtures, plus negative cases:
projection-only grants, tenant-admin implication, secret-bearing fields.
Follow the existing tool layout under `tools/`.
## Decide the read surface
```task
id: NK-WP-0045-T04
status: wait
depends_on: [NK-WP-0045-T02]
needs_human: true
blocking_reason: "Needs a decision on where a workload reads the record (OpenBao-held, platform service, or repository artifact) and which owner delivers it."
priority: high
```
Options and the owner (net-kingdom versus railiance-platform) go to Bernd; the
answer fixes T05.
## Deliver the read path with the owner
```task
id: NK-WP-0045-T05
status: wait
depends_on: [NK-WP-0045-T04]
blocking_reason: "Depends on the read-surface decision and on the delivering owner."
priority: medium
```
Hand off the schema and read contract to the owner; NetKingdom does not absorb
the runtime. Include the fail-closed and staleness rules from ADR-0017.
## Close the loop with user-engine
```task
id: NK-WP-0045-T06
status: wait
depends_on: [NK-WP-0045-T05]
blocking_reason: "Needs the delivered read path."
priority: medium
```
Tell user-engine the read path is live so USER-WP-0037-T02 can derive
`AccountAuthority.root-grant` from it, and record the evidence.
## Acceptance Criteria
- The custody-record schema and validator exist and reject secret-bearing and
projection-only inputs.
- A workload can read the root-grant fact from an owner-delivered surface.
- user-engine derives the root grant without inferring it from claims.