Security review P2s:
- A binding proposal keeps only its structured request fields. The
free-text reason is never written to the private proposal or covered
by its digest.
- A root copy's receipts are checked at prepare, at check, and again
under the organization lock before the write and before publication.
A copy removed, replaced or unreadable since boot refuses with
instance-fired, copy-stale or root-policy-unreadable.
Build review P2:
- A root copy's admitted projects come from the project unions,
recomputed from the current document and the boot's root agents. A
project that excludes the copy, or whose union refuses, is never in
reach; a request naming it refuses with credential-scope-exceeded.
Build review P3s: tests for proposal-time shadowing, the loader's
copyBindings validation, a pending record that covers every service,
a stricter path check on the refusal table, and refusal codes on every
bare rejects in the binding tests.
CB0: registry incarnation minted at reserve (legacy entries get one at
the first binding proposal, under the registry lock); copyId, source
and definition pin, binding generation; a pure resolver where
effective = role intersect approved and only a bound, matching,
unshadowed record resolves.
CB1: copyBindings in the organization file (ids, scope names, project
ids and integers only). applyCopyBindingDecision is its only writer,
behind a module-private capability every other commit is fenced
against. A binding is an owner-only subtype of the hire decision:
only the chief raises it, no autonomy level, resolver agent, member
right, tester or reader resolves it. Digest, expiry, single
consumption, revision, generation, incarnation and definition pin are
rechecked before any effect; a bind writes pending, an unbind the
unbound tombstone, receipts are paths only. Nothing writes bound, so
nothing launches on a binding yet (CB2/CB3). The org service and the
Console update path keep copyBindings server-held. Eight new refusal
codes with next steps.
jason.woltje