ops-warden/workplans/WARDEN-WP-0040-unknown-zone-fail-closed-adoption.md
tegwick 8e1b621116 docs: assent to v0.8 obligation 3, and price its adoption
gate-house circulated security-layer-model v0.8, whose §6.4 obligation 3
makes our `unknown: fail_open` cell non-conformant, and asked to be argued
with rather than obeyed.

Finding 1 -- assent. They wrote the falsifier into GH-DEC-2026-009: a scope
genuinely unknown AND genuinely low-consequence, expected to be a §5.1
read-only diagnostic. We looked and do not have one. The stance map governs
`warden sign` -- a credential-issuing side effect -- so §5.1 does not reach
it and the argument stands. Being unclassifiable must not buy permissiveness.

Finding 2 -- adopting it today would be a global fail-closed flag in all but
name. Of four signing targets, zero resolve to a zone and three are
`unknown`, so the cell would fail closed on essentially every certificate
during a flex-auth outage -- including the SSH certificate needed to reach
the host and repair flex-auth. That is exactly ADR-0006's rejected
configuration reached by another route. Asked for a dated transition gated
on coverage, or failing that for §13.1 to record coverage alongside stance:
a row reading `unknown: fail_closed` while every target is unknown is
conformant and misleading.

Not flipping the cell. It is a proposed standard, 18 of our 18 unknown
lanes are unknown because another repo has not declared, and ADR-0009 rule 3
forbids closing that with inference -- a stricter stance is not a licence to
manufacture the membership that makes it survivable. WARDEN-WP-0040 records
the order: classify the continuity path, raise coverage by asking owners,
then supersede ADR-0009's unknown row.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013EPuTc18FjU5WFqoSEKH3C

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1276224@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 426ec497-e1c4-4dd3-b417-dfce1ca1dbc3
2026-09-09 14:42:20 +02:00

4.7 KiB

id type title domain repo status owner topic_slug planning_priority depends_on_workplans created updated
WARDEN-WP-0040 workplan Adopt unknown -> fail_closed behind signing-target classification coverage infotech ops-warden proposed ops-warden netkingdom P1
WARDEN-WP-0032
WARDEN-WP-0034
2026-09-09 2026-09-09

WARDEN-WP-0040 — unknownfail_closed, in the right order

security-layer-model v0.8 §6.4 obligation 3 (proposed, 2026-09-06) rules that unknown is not a zone and must resolve to fail_closed. ops-warden's pep-stance.yaml declares unknown: fail_open under ADR-0009.

We agree with the rule. history/2026-09-09-layer-model-v08-review.md records the assent and why our falsifier check failed: the cell governs certificate issuance, not a §5.1 read-only diagnostic, so nothing rescues it.

We disagree with adopting it first. Measured 2026-09-09: of four signing targets, zero resolve to a zone, three are unknown, one is not-applicable. Flipping the cell today makes flex-auth a hard dependency of essentially every certificate — ADR-0006's rejected configuration, reached by a different route, including the continuity path needed to repair flex-auth itself.

So: coverage first, then the cell. That ordering is the whole holding of ADR-0006 and the reason ADR-0009 replaced a global switch with a zone map.

Tasks

id: WARDEN-WP-0040-T01
status: todo
priority: high

Classify the continuity path before anything else changes.

The deadlock is specific and worth naming before it is designed around: flex-auth unreachable → operator needs an SSH certificate to reach the host → target is unknown because nobody classified the repair path → fail_closed denies it.

z2-continuity exists for this and its stance is fail_open, so the fix is classification, not an exception. Determine which actor(s) constitute the repair path, establish whether the declaration is ops-warden's to make (our own tenancy.yaml covers ops-warden as a workload; the actors' target workloads may not be ours), and route what is not.

Blocks T03. Converting the cell with the repair path unclassified is the one outcome this workplan exists to prevent.

id: WARDEN-WP-0040-T02
status: todo
priority: high

Raise signing-target coverage, by asking owners — never by inferring.

Three actor resources report workload_resolution_absent: agt-codex-interhub-bootstrap, agt-state-hub-bridge, atm-backup-daily. Their owners (ops-bridge and the backup execution unit among them) have not published an authoritative workload identity declaration.

ADR-0009 rule 3 forbids closing this with path or repository-name inference, and that prohibition holds under pressure from this workplan specifically — adopting a stricter stance is not a licence to manufacture the membership that makes it survivable.

Route to each owner with the concrete consequence: while the declaration is absent their actor cannot be issued a certificate during a flex-auth outage once the cell converts. That is a better ask than a generic request to publish a declaration, and it is true.

Report coverage with scripts/report_workload_join.py; this task is done when coverage is stated, not when it reaches a threshold — the threshold is T03's gate, and owners may legitimately decline.

id: WARDEN-WP-0040-T03
status: wait
priority: high

Convert the cell and supersede ADR-0009's unknown row.

Gated on T01, and on v0.8 (or its successor) reaching accepted. Do not convert against a proposed standard.

ADR-0009 is owner: ops-warden, so changing it means a superseding ADR, never an in-place edit (.claude/rules/architecture.md). The superseding record should carry the v0.8 argument rather than restate it: unknown is not a zone, so a §9.3 per-zone trade was never made for that request.

pep-stance.yaml is asserted equal to PolicyConfig.failure_modes by tests/test_layer_conformance.py, so the map and the code convert in one commit or the test fails — which is the property that makes the map worth publishing.

id: WARDEN-WP-0040-T04
status: todo
priority: medium

Return findings to gate-house and track the transition ask.

Sent 2026-09-09 with the review. Two asks, in preference order: obligation 3 names a dated transitional state gated on coverage; or failing that, §13.1 records classification coverage alongside stance, so a register row cannot read unknown: fail_closed while every target is unknown.

If both are declined, that is an answer and this workplan proceeds unchanged — the cell stays a declared gap under §11 with this workplan as its route, which is what the declared-gap mark (our own v0.6 finding) exists to express.