a5d90ff80120863589542bb074d34b02b403700a
4 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 admin
|
a5d90ff801 |
R-241 part 3: abandoning starts a 14-day countdown that ends the question
Until now "set aside" renamed the remote store and touched neither the escrow
nor the key, so the hub went on holding a sealed package for a key the box no
longer used. Shape (c) compares those two, finds them different, and offers
recovery - correctly, and for ever. A customer who had already said "I do not
want the old data" would be asked again at every login.
The operator's ruling is that the answer is NOT a "they decided" flag: fix the
state, do not remember that it is wrong. So the decision starts a countdown,
at the end of which the set-aside store and the sealed package that protects
it are removed TOGETHER. Afterwards shape (c) has nothing to compare and the
offer falls silent on its own - because the state is right, not because
something remembers it once was not.
THE GRACE IS REAL. The recovery offer stays reachable for the whole 14 days;
that is the change-of-mind path, and a grace in which recovery is impossible
would be decorative.
BOTH HALVES OR NEITHER. Removing only the store leaves a package that opens
nothing; removing only the package leaves ciphertext nobody can ever decrypt.
The two cannot be atomic across two machines, so it is a two-phase commit:
delete the store, record a durable marker, and keep DECLARING
offsite.abandon_purge_requested until the hub's ACK stops reporting a
superseded package. A crash between the halves re-declares on the next sweep;
it never leaves the pair half-removed and silent.
HUB HALF - SEC 8.2 ANSWERED: yes, the hub was needed, and only for this.
store.PurgeSupersededEscrowForCustomer is the one place R-198's retention is
ever undone, and it never touches host_escrow (the package covering the key
the box uses now). The handler acts on the DECLARATION, never an inference,
and is placed immediately BEFORE the ACK is built - so
GetEscrowStatusForCustomer reads the effect and the SAME response closes the
box's two-phase commit. No second round-trip and no window where the box
thinks it is still owed. felhom-agent was NOT touched.
The countdown starts in ResetOrphanedRepo, NOT in the shared helper: the
helper is also the unclaimed auto-reset path, where nobody decided anything,
and an as-delivered box tidying a stranger's leftover store must not get a
customer's deletion clock. Pinned by a test.
Cancellation is wired into the recovery unlock, BEFORE the tier-up and the
listing - those can fail, and a countdown surviving a successful unlock
because a later step errored would delete the history the customer just
proved they can open.
The sweep is a Daily job at 05:10, not on the backup leg: it must run on a box
whose tier is not configured for runs. Quiet by construction on every box with
no countdown, and that silence is asserted.
Tests (all clock-injected; SEC 7.4 forbids shortening a live timer):
Scenario E (aside + package kept + countdown + offer still reachable, and
NOTHING deleted), Scenario F (both halves, the declaration repeating, the
close-out), Scenario G (cancel, path still nameable, no later deletion),
plus: not closed out while the package remains, a transport failure leaves the
countdown due and retrying, the no-op sweep issues zero remote commands, and
the unclaimed auto-reset starts no countdown.
RED-PROOFS, each with the mutation confirmed present in the file first:
F1) store deletion skipped -> Scenario F FAILS (no rm issued)
F2) declaration dropped from the report -> Scenario F FAILS (the hub is
never asked; the package would outlive the store for ever)
G) CancelAbandon made a no-op -> Scenario G FAILS (uncancellable countdown)
Green: controller and hub both build, vet and test clean; controller gates OK.
NOTHING WAS DELETED ANYWHERE - the terminal step has only ever run against
in-test fakes.
|
||
|
admin
|
1e759a16ec |
R-224/R-226 Part 1: why the unlock failed decides what we say
The failure branch was a two-way choice — superseded? M4 : M1 — and BOTH are statements about the customer's code. rerr was never inspected, so a hub that refused, an agent that was stopped and a genuinely mistyped code all produced the same accusation. Measured live 2026-08-05 with a CORRECT current code: hub firewalled off 0.0556s, agent stopped 0.0299s, against ~1.0s for a real unseal. Five classes, from the VALUE and never the text: hub-unreachable 502/503 from the agent — the code was NOT used agent-unreachable no agent verdict at all (transport) — NOT used no-bundle 404 bundle-too-old 409 asked-and-refused 400 — the ONLY class that may mention typing unknown everything else -> NEUTRAL, the safe default agentapi.RecoveryRefusal carries the status as a value (refusalError flattened it into a sentence, and a sentence is not something a caller can branch on). THE OLD-AGENT CASE IS WHY THIS NEEDS A COUPLING. Agent < 0.126.0 answers 400 for both a fetch failure and a wrong code, so a 400 from one cannot be read as a refusal. FeatureRecoveryFailureClass (MinAgent 0.126.0) withholds that reading and the 400 degrades to neutral. The gate BLOCKS NOTHING — it only decides whether the customer may be told to check their typing. R-226: the superseded message now names BOTH possibilities and restores the ten-words prompt. The two are indistinguishable at the engine; the honest message says so. It still does not promise the earlier package can be opened. Elapsed time is logged (it is what diagnosed this) and is NEVER a classifier. Tests: scenarios A-E at the HANDLER + the classifier table asserting the same sentence under two statuses classifies two ways. Red-proofs, each demonstrated failing then restored: delete the 502 case (A), remove the mistype clause (C), default to the accusation (D), route an instant transport failure to the typing message (E). Two existing tests encoded the defect and were corrected, not deleted: the web fake returned a BARE error for 'wrong code' (which is the shape of a failure we cannot classify), and R-222's test forbade any mention of typing on a superseded box — half of which R-226 deliberately reverses. 28 packages ok, vet clean, all controller gates OK. |
||
|
admin
|
a3499d1807 |
v0.201.0 — a correct recovery code is never called wrong again (CAMPAIGN-11) — MinAgent 0.125.0
gates / gates (push) Successful in 9s
R-216: the offsite key recovery is a coupled feature and now says so. featureProbes +
featureMinAgent 0.125.0 + a Supports gate at the unlock entry point, FAILING CLOSED — an
agent that cannot answer is named as such instead of the customer's code being blamed.
Measured live: a 404 from agent 0.120.0 came back as "we did not accept your recovery
code, check that all ten words", in 0.134 s, against a perfect code.
R-218: delete the repo-password short-circuit in needsOffsiteCredential. The declaration
stops when the TIER WORKS, not when a key exists — installing a key is the recovery
screen's whole job, so succeeding at recovery was switching off the mechanism that would
have delivered the coordinates to use it.
R-219: the unlock finishes the job — place the key, bring the tier up, then list. Without
it the promised listing could never render on the shape the screen exists for.
R-217: an unreadable store no longer claims to have opened with unattributable content
(the OffsiteInventory{} zero value). Opened / empty / unreadable are three states.
R-222: a code that is right about a RETAINED earlier package is named, not blamed. States
what the hub knows and promises nothing — no read path exists.
R-215: GET /recovery is gated on the same predicate as the interception.
Five red-proofs, each demonstrated failing and restored.
|
||
|
admin
|
636c51e542 |
R-193: the recovery screen — unlocking, and only unlocking (v0.200.0)
A customer whose machine was rebuilt had everything needed to get their data back and no way to find out: the only route was a command line. This is the screen that closes that. IT UNLOCKS, AND ONLY UNLOCKS (operator ruling). It explains, takes the recovery code, opens the repository and shows what is in there — apps, dates, sizes. It restores nothing: restore is already per-app and lives in the backups area, and a screen that unlocks and then offers to overwrite is two decisions wearing one button. ONE CORE, TWO CALLERS. RecoverInstallCore is split out of RecoverAndInstall; the CLI wrapper keeps its exit codes and printed lines byte-identical, and the handler drives the same function. Two implementations of the one operation that can permanently lose a customer's data would drift, and only one would be tested. Asserted from source on both sides by AST. THREE WAYS OUT, none a dismiss button: recover; 'most nem' (the full page stops interrupting, the backups-area entry point stays PERMANENTLY, bound to the offer and never to the postpone flag); and 'I do not want the old data' — confirmed TWICE and reaching the SHIPPED move-aside, which sets aside and never deletes. THE CODE IS HANDLED NO MORE LOOSELY THAN ON THE COMMAND LINE: POST body only, never logged, never persisted, never echoed, cleared on every path, no-store, autocomplete off. No lockout — the code is a ten-word phrase, and locking a customer out of their own data for a typo is worse than anything it prevents. TWO DEFECTS THE TESTS CAUGHT, both fixed: an UNCLAIMED (legacy-open) box would have been shown the page, because RequireAuth passes such a box through; and the inventory nil-dereferenced when no off-site target was configured, which is exactly the pristine rebuilt shape. |