Compare commits
3 commits
f766400563
...
61c992923c
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61c992923c | |||
| ee94c18938 | |||
| d7f4ebcfe0 |
5 changed files with 78 additions and 14 deletions
|
|
@ -10,12 +10,12 @@
|
|||
# declares it, and is null where the field set has not been established --
|
||||
# null means unknown, never 'one field'.
|
||||
|
||||
generated_at: "2026-08-22T23:31:10Z"
|
||||
generated_at: "2026-08-28T19:58:57Z"
|
||||
source: ops-warden/registry/routing/catalog.yaml
|
||||
catalog_revision: "0fae0904ce8d8694338dd53a8a79abec5fec788d"
|
||||
catalog_revision_date: "2026-08-23T01:31:05+02:00"
|
||||
catalog_dirty: false
|
||||
high_risk_lane_count: 21
|
||||
catalog_revision: "c374d41a4925720ae7706dfda020537b60a07eb9"
|
||||
catalog_revision_date: "2026-08-23T21:43:12+02:00"
|
||||
catalog_dirty: true
|
||||
high_risk_lane_count: 23
|
||||
concrete_path_count: 14
|
||||
|
||||
# Graded high but not a single KV address -- a routing pattern, a broker
|
||||
|
|
@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ concrete_path_count: 14
|
|||
no_concrete_path:
|
||||
- database-dynamic-credentials
|
||||
- inter-hub-bootstrap-ssh
|
||||
- net-kingdom-lldap-bind-credential
|
||||
- net-kingdom-privacyidea-admin-token
|
||||
- object-storage-sts
|
||||
- openbao-api-key
|
||||
- openbao-platform-admin-login
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -281,8 +281,8 @@ entries:
|
|||
delegation:
|
||||
mode: interim
|
||||
intended_owner: key-cape
|
||||
blocked_on: "REFUSED by secrets-engine 2026-08-21: login, MFA and identity-token issuance are key-cape/Keycloak's; secrets-engine may consume OIDC for OpenBao auth but does not own the login capability. ops-warden agrees — intended_owner corrected from secrets-engine to key-cape. Not yet asked of key-cape."
|
||||
reviewed: "2026-08-21"
|
||||
blocked_on: "REFUSED by secrets-engine 2026-08-21: login, MFA and identity-token issuance are key-cape/Keycloak's; secrets-engine may consume OIDC for OpenBao auth but does not own the login capability. ops-warden agrees — intended_owner corrected from secrets-engine to key-cape. Asked of key-cape 2026-08-28; KEY-WP-0009 accepting issuance ownership for machine identities is the precedent that makes it answerable."
|
||||
reviewed: "2026-08-28"
|
||||
verified: asked-and-waiting
|
||||
# Login lane (WP-0014 T4) — interactive auth bootstrap, not a secret read. No
|
||||
# secret-read gate (you have no identity yet) and no caller-auth precheck (the
|
||||
|
|
@ -710,9 +710,9 @@ entries:
|
|||
delegation:
|
||||
mode: interim
|
||||
intended_owner: key-cape
|
||||
blocked_on: "client_secret_basic exchange is a key-cape protocol procedure, not a KV read; KEY-WP-0008 finished 2026-08-15 without a key-cape-native exchange/rotation command, and the workplan that would add one is not yet opened (key-cape acked interim 2026-08-15)"
|
||||
reviewed: "2026-08-17"
|
||||
verified: unverified
|
||||
blocked_on: "client_secret_basic exchange is a key-cape protocol procedure, not a KV read; still no key-cape-native exchange/rotation command. Re-checked against key-cape source 2026-08-28: KEY-WP-0009 finished 2026-08-23 and did add bounded service-auth (per-client tokenLifetime, docs/openbao-service-auth-contract.md), but that is client_credentials JWT issuance for OpenBao machine login — it does not front this client_secret_basic exchange or its rotation. The server advertises client_secret_basic (src/internal/server/oidc/discovery.go) without exposing an owner command for it. Blocker stands."
|
||||
reviewed: "2026-08-28"
|
||||
verified: source-read
|
||||
risk: high
|
||||
workload_ref:
|
||||
applicability: applicable
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -14,7 +14,9 @@ def test_repo_catalog_uses_only_explicit_workload_references():
|
|||
assert report["ok"] is True
|
||||
assert len(report["resolved"]) == 3
|
||||
assert len(report["unknown"]) == 17
|
||||
assert len(report["not_applicable"]) == 9
|
||||
# 11 since WARDEN-WP-0033: the two NetKingdom SSO lanes (c374d41) are
|
||||
# provider/control-plane credentials, not workload delivery lanes.
|
||||
assert len(report["not_applicable"]) == 11
|
||||
assert {row["lane"] for row in report["resolved"]} == {
|
||||
"ops-warden-warden-sign-token",
|
||||
"issue-core-ingestion-api-key",
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -222,6 +222,39 @@ test results, and infra acceptance. T02 remains `progress` until
|
|||
that owner gate is open; acceptance will permit preparation of a new scenario,
|
||||
not execution or reuse of the terminal one.
|
||||
|
||||
**Owner gate CLOSED — accepted 2026-08-23, found 2026-08-28.**
|
||||
`railiance-platform` accepted the exact revision `0fae0904`. Recorded in their
|
||||
`RPF-WP-0017-attended-login-output-containment.md` (`status: finished`), which
|
||||
also records railiance-infra's independent approval at `186b030` and marks all
|
||||
five acceptance criteria met. The receipt digest was verified here rather than
|
||||
taken on trust: `docs/evidence/RAILIANCE-WP-0026-T01-ops-warden-receipt.json` at
|
||||
ops-warden `bc1966da` hashes to
|
||||
`d2ba444ed16989590325697e69d25283dc75a9432c29a72e627e80bf9fd987e4`, matching
|
||||
their record exactly.
|
||||
|
||||
Note the identifier: the remediation interface recorded above as
|
||||
`RAILIANCE-WP-0026-T01` is `RPF-WP-0017-T01` in the owner's repo. Searching for
|
||||
the cited id finds an unrelated workplan, which is part of why this sat unnoticed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Their acceptance is source acceptance only and authorizes no live OIDC or
|
||||
drill** — their words, and the boundary holds. So T02's state changes but its
|
||||
`Done when` does not: what was blocked was *preparing a new scenario*, and that
|
||||
is now permitted. The terminal NO-GO scenario and its receipts remain unusable.
|
||||
|
||||
**Third instance of the same failure this session.** The acceptance existed for
|
||||
five days; no message reached ops-warden. Identically, `key-cape` accepted the
|
||||
WP-0033-T04 question on 2026-08-23 with no message, and nine unread messages
|
||||
were sitting on already-superseded threads. The `verified:` field added by
|
||||
WP-0033-T05 was built for exactly this and it works — what does not work is
|
||||
waiting for a counterparty to tell you. Re-checking a blocker means reading the
|
||||
owner's repository.
|
||||
|
||||
**Remaining to close T02:** one attended production emergency seal/unseal drill,
|
||||
requiring a new scenario id, fresh owner receipts from platform/infra/master, a
|
||||
fully parameterized green preflight, and a new human GO. It is executed by the
|
||||
platform owner, never by a coding agent. That is an operator decision, not an
|
||||
agent one, so T02 stays `progress` and the decision is surfaced rather than taken.
|
||||
|
||||
## Task: Tamper-evident policy governance + reconcile
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -4,14 +4,14 @@ type: workplan
|
|||
title: "Native lane handoff — review secrets-engine's catalog admission, and fix what it exposed"
|
||||
domain: infotech
|
||||
repo: ops-warden
|
||||
status: active
|
||||
status: finished
|
||||
owner: ops-warden
|
||||
topic_slug: netkingdom
|
||||
planning_priority: P1
|
||||
depends_on_workplans:
|
||||
- WARDEN-WP-0030
|
||||
created: "2026-08-21"
|
||||
updated: "2026-08-23"
|
||||
updated: "2026-08-28"
|
||||
state_hub_workstream_id: "4627d89b-4b00-562a-81e9-76e96f90fa7e"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ railiance-platform may deny more, deny less, or dispute a grade (`ADR-0002`).
|
|||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: WARDEN-WP-0033-T04
|
||||
status: wait
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
state_hub_task_id: "5acac140-a586-5db3-b231-bbf236710786"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
|
@ -212,6 +212,33 @@ accept that target identity with an authoritative workplan/interface, or refuse
|
|||
and name the actual owner. T04 remains `wait` until one of those two answers is
|
||||
recorded; the live AppRole is operational evidence, not an ownership answer.
|
||||
|
||||
**Answered — accepted. Closed 2026-08-28.** `key-cape` accepted issuance
|
||||
ownership in `KEY-WP-0009-T03` (`status: done`, 2026-08-23): the non-secret static
|
||||
registration `codex-railiance-platform` is published in
|
||||
`key-cape/config/service-clients.example.yaml` — subject
|
||||
`service:codex:railiance-platform`, tenant `tenant:coulomb`, role `coding-agent`,
|
||||
scope `openbao:login`, `client_credentials`, 15-minute lifetime — with the
|
||||
service-auth claims, renewal, expiry and failure semantics in
|
||||
`key-cape/docs/openbao-service-auth-contract.md` (`T02`). The split is exactly the
|
||||
one the routing asked for: KeyCape owns JWT issuance and client disablement,
|
||||
railiance-platform owns the exact-bound OpenBao role and policy, OpenBao owns
|
||||
enforcement, and no secret value enters either repository.
|
||||
|
||||
**The answer was found by reading their repo, not by receiving it.**
|
||||
`KEY-WP-0009-T04` records replying to ops-warden; no such message exists in the
|
||||
ops-warden inbox — 0 messages from `key-cape`, read or unread. The acceptance had
|
||||
been sitting done for five days while this task sat `wait` on it.
|
||||
|
||||
That is the T05 lesson landing on T04: a blocker is a claim about the world at a
|
||||
date, and this one had stopped being true. `verified: source-read` is doing real
|
||||
work here — it is the difference between "we asked" and "we checked". The
|
||||
mechanism is right; what it needs is for someone to run it, which is why the
|
||||
lanes below were re-verified in the same pass rather than date-bumped.
|
||||
|
||||
Consequence for `ADR-0004`: the honour-system `WARDEN_AGENT_ID` marker now has a
|
||||
real issuance identity behind it on the OpenBao side. ops-warden remains a
|
||||
consumer of that identity and does not own it.
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: WARDEN-WP-0033-T05
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue