merge train B: land five already-green PRs in one CI cycle (#254 #255 #256 #259 #264) - #275
Merged
Conversation
… stale "pinned" doc claims (BACKLOG #338) The engine's TLS key-exchange (KEX) groups are INHERITED from OpenSSL's default group list, not pinned to the approved set. harden_kex_groups pins nothing until SSLContext.set_groups lands in Python 3.15, so on every interpreter this project currently runs on the approved pin is inert. This is documentation accuracy plus observability -- it changes no live TLS behaviour (the TLS 1.2+ floor is the enforced control), and on a NOT-DEPLOYED beta there is no exposure today; the pin is a future 3.15 hardening. Two parts: 1. Report-only surfacing. New pure helper config/tls_policy.kex_groups_report() builds a throwaway probe context and asks the ONE authority, harden_kex_groups, what it manages to pin -- so the read-out can never drift from what the connectors actually do. It returns "inherited (...)" on a pre-3.15 interpreter and "pinned: ..." on 3.15+. Surfaced as an additive SecurityPosture.kex_groups field (str | None, default None), wired in create_app beside fips_attestation(), rendered as a status-page row in the web console beside the FIPS/OpenSSL rows. Report-only: it reflects, and changes, no TLS behaviour. 2. Three doc-accuracy edits correcting restatements that still read as "pinned": CONTAINER-EXPOSURE-EVALUATION.md (verification table), ASVS-L2-PHASE0-CHANGES.md (PQC roadmap row), and #200's Closes line in docs/archive/backlog/BACKLOG-CLOSED.md (11.6.2 annotated PARTIAL). Each links to PHI.md's data-in-transit section, the single source of record for the measured accepted set, rather than restating it. The two Python-3.15 tripwire tests in test_tls_policy.py that fire when set_groups/get_groups land are left untouched -- they are the signal to actually set the pin. Engine UI seam bumped 17 -> 18: the golden seam snapshot introspects SecurityPosture's field set, so a purely additive field trips the handshake; SUPPORTED_ENGINE_SEAMS and the golden snapshot updated to match. Tests: test_tls_policy.test_kex_groups_report_reports_inherited_today (the helper reports inherited + names the approved list, never "pinned:"); test_api_auth.test_security_posture_reports_kex_groups (the field flows through the MONITORING_READ-gated, audited posture route and matches the helper); a status-builder assertion that the console renders the row. All three falsified: blanking the helper reddens the two report tests (assert 'inherited' in ''); removing the console row reddens the status-builder test (assert 'key-exchange' in html).
Flip the #338 status banner from filed/not-started to shipped, now that the report-only kex_groups posture field and the three doc-accuracy corrections have landed. The banner records that the KEX groups are documented as inherited (the pin is inert until Python 3.15) plus the report-only surfacing behind engine seam v18. Banner line only, under the #338 heading, verified by number. The ranked table, the four census distribution lines, and every other item's banner are untouched. The census was NOT recomputed.
) A findings note comparing Windmill's seven OpenFlow step-attributes (retry, timeout, stop_after_if, skip_if, continue_on_error, mock, cache_ttl) against MessageFoundry's engine/handler vocabulary. Per attribute: what it is, the engine analogue (grounded in a real symbol/file), and the gap (covered-different-locus / partial / absent). This is a review, not a feature. OpenFlow is explicitly NOT a compatibility target; the note is an informational vocabulary map, not a gap-to-close list. Adopting a declarative artifact stays declined by ADR 0076 section 7 and BACKLOG #26. Framing is conditional throughout (not-deployed beta). Lands at docs/research/openflow-step-attributes.md, mirroring the existing docs/research/ review-note convention (config-ux-review.md, message-model-eval.md, ide-low-code-options.md). The mock row cites config/db_lookup.py / config/fhir_lookup.py for the pure-dry-run raise guard (config/db_lookup.py raise DbLookupError / config/fhir_lookup.py raise FhirLookupError), not config/wiring.py whose raise text is about the router phase.
The findings note (docs/research/openflow-step-attributes.md) is the item's expected output and is now delivered, so #238's banner flips from open to closed. One banner line only, under the #238 heading. Census NOT recomputed: this commit changes only #238's banner line and does not touch the ranked table or the four census distribution lines.
…ACKLOG #1013) The `[auth] enabled=false` startup arm keyed on the bind alone (`not settings.api.is_loopback`), so it did not fire for a loopback bind behind a declared upstream TLS terminator. A PHI instance with authentication entirely off behind a declared terminator would have started with no refusal and no warning on first deployment, while the same topology with auth on but MFA off is already refused by the gate #326 fixed. The two arms disagreed about what "exposed" means in the same file. Hoist the single `instance_exposed` definition (#326: an off-loopback bind OR a declared upstream TLS terminator) above the auth-off arm and widen the arm to consult it, so it refuses on a non-loopback bind OR a declared terminator. The existing loopback refusal is kept; the condition is widened, not replaced. Load order verified: `instance_exposed`'s inputs -- `settings.api.host` (through `is_loopback`) and `settings.api.tls_terminated_upstream` -- are read straight off the loaded config, and the only in-place mutation of `settings.api.*` between the hoisted definition and the former site is `serve_ui` (twice), which the predicate does not read. The definition remains defined exactly once. Tests (tests/test_cli.py): auth off + declared terminator on a loopback bind refuses (positive); auth off + true loopback with no terminator still starts (negative control); auth on + declared terminator is unaffected by the arm. Each was falsified -- reverting the arm to the bare bind check reds the positive test, firing on any auth-off reds the negative control, and dropping the auth check reds the auth-on test; each was restored. Docs updated so the contract travels with the code (CLAUDE.md 11): DEPLOYMENT.md, SYSTEM-REQUIREMENTS.md, SECURITY.md, REMOTE-CONSOLE.md and SECURITY-LOOSENING.md now describe the auth-off refusal as firing on an exposed instance (a non-loopback bind OR a declared terminator), not on the bind alone. BACKLOG #1013
…ion (BACKLOG #1013) Flip the #1013 banner from filed/open to fixed and record, in the AMENDED blockquote, that the load-order prerequisite the item flagged as unproven holds: `instance_exposed`'s inputs resolve where the auth-off arm runs. Name the single-definition pointer comment rather than pin its line number, since the hoist shifts that line. Banner flip only: the ranked table and the four census distribution lines were NOT recomputed. BACKLOG #1013
…ee about one
A session was told a coordinator "might not be there" on the strength of the
session-list MCP tool's `isRunning: false`, and separately the two rosters
reported different branches for one checkout. Both readings were wrong the same
way -- a field answering a question adjacent to the one asked -- and neither trap
was written down anywhere a reader would look.
MEASURED 2026-08-06. A session record holds exactly cwd, entrypoint, kind, name,
nameSource, peerProtocol, pid, procStart, sessionId, startedAt, version. There is
NO branch field. So any branch printed beside a session came from elsewhere, and
the two sources answer different questions while both being labelled "branch":
presence.ps1 / occupancy.ps1 the WORKTREE's branch, live from
`git worktree list --porcelain`. Current.
session-list MCP tool a SESSION attribute captured at registration.
Does not follow a later `git switch`.
For one checkout they reported two different names -- the live roster the branch
that checkout had been switched onto, the session list the one it registered
with. Neither was wrong. A disagreement is not evidence that either roster is
broken, and a branch from the session list must never be quoted as a checkout's
current branch.
ALSO RECORDED, same family: `isRunning` means "currently EXECUTING A TURN", not
"alive". An idle session between turns reads false while being perfectly
reachable. It is not a liveness fence and must not be used as one --
Get-SessionLiveness is, subject to the rule already stated directly above it that
ONLY THE POSITIVE ANSWER IS SAFE TO ACT ON. That rule is why the original
inference was doubly wrong: it drew a negative conclusion from a signal that
cannot support one, using a field that answers a different question.
The concrete branch names are deliberately NOT quoted -- the leak gate refused
the first attempt because a real worktree slug is an internal project name, and
the lesson does not need them.
Documentation only; no behaviour change. Both files parse, presence.ps1 still
runs, 272 tests pass across the coord/presence/occupancy suites.
…lease assets do not support Verified against the actual release assets, not the prose: `gh release download v0.3.2` gives an SBOM with licenses on 40/40 components and hashes on 0/40, and a VEX with `"statements": []`. Two claims did not survive that check. VEX contents. `docs/SUPPLY-CHAIN.md` described the OpenVEX asset as "our per-CVE exploitability assessments" and told the reader it "records, per CVE, whether the vulnerable code is reachable" -- a statement about the contents of a published artifact, false in any tense. It sat immediately after "Do not demand a zero-CVE clean scan", so a procurement reader who applied the VEX, saw no suppressions, and read that as an assessed all-clear would have had no assessment behind it: a compensating control resting on a false premise (CLAUDE.md section 11). The page now names the artifact, says what a statement carries when one exists, and says plainly that where we have not assessed a CVE the document is silent and the scanner's finding stands. The empty-state rule stays stated once, at security/vex/README.md:17-18 and ADR 0149, and is linked rather than re-copied -- the removed sentence was itself the divergent third copy. Component hashes. The inventory sentence enumerated "components, versions, PackageURLs, hashes, and licenses". Backfilling hashes was investigated and rejected on semantics rather than effort: CycloneDX `component.hashes` means the hash of THE file, while requirements-core.lock carries 301 `--hash=sha256:` lines over 41 packages and no package with exactly one (cryptography alone has 40). cyclonedx-py deliberately routes lock hashes to `externalReferences` for that reason, the 1.6 schema imposes no uniqueness constraint so a multi-entry set would validate clean as a silent false claim, and `pip` is an inventoried component with no lock line at all. So the sentence is corrected instead: "at least" replaces the closed enumeration, the reason given is the verified one, and no substitute integrity control is offered -- Sigstore and SLSA attest the SBOM document and our own release files, which is an adjacent question, and the lock is not a released artifact. The same false enumeration sat in scripts/security/sbom_finalize.py's docstring, one hop from the corrected page, which names that script by path in its "for auditors" section. Fixed there too rather than leaving the repo self-contradictory on the fact this commit is about. Nothing is deployed, so nobody has been misled; the defect is that the shipped page WOULD mislead a first reader who tried to verify components against hashes the SBOM does not carry. Deliberately unchanged: the true "hash-locked" phrases at :16 and :86 refer to the lock the inventory is built from, and a blanket scrub of the word would have deleted accurate claims -- the new text disambiguates them instead. No VEX statement is written here; see the notes handed to the coordinator.
…nto merge-train-b
wshallwshall
enabled auto-merge (squash)
August 7, 2026 18:07
This was referenced Aug 7, 2026
Merged
This was referenced Aug 7, 2026
Closed
docs(coord): the session record has no branch field, and two rosters answer different questions
#259
Closed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Second merge train. Same pattern as #274 -- every commit is an already-open, fully-green PR, landed
in one CI cycle instead of five.
fix-338-tls-kex-reportreview-238-openflow-attrsfix-1013-authoff-startup-armclaude/coord-roster-semanticsclaude/draft-sbom-ec9763Why these five
All five had zero failing checks after their stale
npm-auditcleared (that check predated3d061ebd, the js-yaml bump, and was red on runs older than it -- not a real advisory).⭐ All five add ZERO new
docs/BACKLOG.mdheadings -- they update existing item banners only. Soledger_check'sowns()is never consulted and no allocation entitlement is crossed:#258, #261 and #267 are excluded -- each adds a heading allocated to its own worktree, making its
resolution non-delegable. They stay individual.
Merged, not cherry-picked
History preserved, authorship intact. All five merged cleanly -- zero conflicts.
Verification
Run from this worktree's own copy of the checker -- the primary checkout's copy resolves its root
via
Path(__file__).resolve().parents[2]and would silently validate main's ledger instead, printingOKfor a branch it never read.Ordering
Cut from
origin/main, not stacked on #274. If #274 lands first this will goBEHINDand needs aplain
update-branch; the two trains carry disjoint PRs, so no content overlap.On merge
Close #254, #255, #256, #259 and #264 as superseded -- their content is here.