Commit Graph

8 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
null b81a4fb43b docs: stop describing a biometric key that does not exist
SECURITY.md and AndroidKeyStoreMacProvider's KDoc both described a second,
biometric-bound Keystore key taking "the opposite policy" and invalidating
on enrolment. There is no such key: grep -rn BiometricKey found only those
two sentences. A successful fingerprint flips an in-memory session flag --
no CryptoObject, no key unwrap -- so the biometric path is a gate, not a
second secret.

A security document that describes protection the code does not have is
worse than one admitting the gap, because the next reader trusts it.

The absent version is not obviously wrong, so both places now say why it
is filed rather than built (#63): binding a key to biometric enrolment
means a partner adding their own fingerprint invalidates it, which is
exactly the protection somebody would want -- but it only degrades safely
where a PIN sits behind it. In a fingerprint-only lock, a key destroyed by
an ordinary enrolment is the no-recovery policy turned against its owner.

Also adds the six device rows the development log has claimed since Batch
06 were "rows in SECURITY_CHECKLIST.md rather than memory". They were
never added: a grep for biometric, fingerprint, TalkBack, rotation,
fontScale and flicker over that file returned nothing. A release gate that
silently skips half its checks is the failure the file exists to prevent.

closes #66

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-21 00:13:01 -05:00
null 6591951c8d docs: the export's device checks are a release gate, not a memory
The Storage Access Framework path is covered by Robolectric — the intent
contract, the bytes reaching the stream, a failing stream never reported as
done, and cacheDir empty afterwards — but no test reaches a real document
provider, and the picker UI itself has not been driven on a device.

Recorded as three checklist rows rather than claimed. The only emulator running
on this machine belongs to another project, and starting one on top of it was
not worth the contention.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-19 22:17:01 -05:00
null 1d8d7cc688 feat: app lock, with no way to reset a forgotten PIN
§45 asks for biometric/PIN gating. UserPreferences.biometricLockEnabled has
existed since Batch 01 with nothing outside its own module reading it; this
wires it, and adds the rest.

The recovery question was the reason #34 sat open, and it is decided: there is
no recovery. A backdoor into a period tracker's lock would be used by exactly
the person the lock exists to stop. Everything below follows from that.

## The gate

AppLockGate wraps the whole composition rather than being a screen inside it.
Today, Calendar and Insights each start collecting from CycleRepository the
moment they compose, so a lock implemented as a nav destination would already
have read the history before the user proved anything. content() is invoked
only in the unlocked branch.

Re-lock on ON_STOP, not ON_PAUSE — pause fires for the shade, quick settings
and a permission dialog. Two guards on top: isChangingConfigurations, or
rotation and the fontScale-2.0 pass both re-lock; and authInProgress, or an OEM
biometric overlay that stops the activity produces a lock that can never be
opened. No grace period: SECURITY.md leads with "someone who picks up an
unlocked phone", which is the window a grace period covers.

The unlock flag lives in a @Singleton, never in saved state. rememberSaveable
looks like the obvious home and would restore a background-killed app already
unlocked — the single most likely way to meet the lock screen would be the one
path that skipped it.

## What is stored is not the PIN

  mac = HMAC(keystoreKey, 0x01 || salt || PBKDF2-SHA256(pin, salt, 210k))

Two layers because they defend different things. The Keystore MAC is what makes
a six-digit PIN safe at all — a million candidates is nothing to an attacker who
can compute the hash, and impossible for one who cannot get the key off the
device. PBKDF2 underneath is for the day that assumption breaks. 0x01 is a
domain-separation tag; the lockout counter is MACed under 0x02.

The key omits six builder calls and the KDoc names every one. setUserAuthenti-
cationRequired is the important absence: it would bind the key to the device
lock, so changing a passcode would destroy it — and under no-recovery that is
somebody's whole history gone for an unrelated reason. It would also be a
bypass, since SECURITY.md already names "someone who knows the unlock PIN" as
an adversary. The biometric key is separate and takes the opposite policy,
where invalidation correctly degrades to "use your PIN".

## Wrong PINs cost time, never data

Four free attempts, then 30s/1m/2m/5m/15m, capped forever. No attempt limit and
no auto-wipe: under no-recovery an auto-wipe would let a partner, a child or a
pocket destroy a history while knowing nothing. Both clock bypasses are closed —
the wait is the longer of a wall-clock and a monotonic deadline, and a reboot
re-applies it in full, detected by elapsedRealtime going backwards.

## Two writes that had to move

Tapping "Not yet" on a reminder writes a NotYetObservation. That button is on
the phone's own lock screen, reachable by anybody, so the action is now parked
in AppLockController and applied only after an unlock — dropped if the session
never unlocks. Behaviour is unchanged when the lock is off.

The erase behind "Forgot your PIN?" deletes health data, then the Keystore key,
then the lock store. Skipping the middle step leaves the user erased AND still
locked out; prove-guard mutates that line out and requires exactly one red.

## Found by testing, not by review

  - A fresh install began in a 15-minute lockout: "no counter yet" and "counter
    was tampered with" were the same value. They are now distinct.
  - Setting a PIN locked you out of the session you set it in. Found on the
    emulator, not in a test.
  - Kotlin block comments nest, so `domain/*` in a KDoc opens one. Twice.

## Verified

244 JVM tests, 0 skipped. KeystoreVerifierTest runs on PeriodMinSdk26 and
PeriodQA — including that PBKDF2WithHmacSHA256 exists at API 26, the one choice
here with no margin, and that the key is not auth-bound on either.

On device: wrong PIN refused, correct PIN opens, am kill then reopen lands on
the lock screen, turning the lock off requires the current PIN, and
`adb exec-out screencap` returns mean=0 stddev=0 — FLAG_SECURE is real.

androidx.biometric 1.1.0 is the newest stable (1.4.0 is alpha; biometric-ktx
never shipped one). It merges USE_BIOMETRIC and USE_FINGERPRINT, which failed
checkPermissions until they were allowed on purpose, and it drags fragment to
1.5.1 — pinned to 1.9.0 since MainActivity is now a FragmentActivity.

closes #34

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-19 04:02:47 -05:00
null 17cddb2a61 docs: record why the database is not encrypted, and drop the claim that it is
Asked whether encryption at rest could be added. It can, and it should not be
yet — so the reasoning goes in the document that owns the claim, before it is
forgotten and re-derived from scratch.

The architecture decides it. ReminderCoordinator collects Room flows at every
process start, including processes started with no Activity after a reboot,
and ReminderWorker reads the forecast on a schedule. The key would have to be
readable with no user present, which is the availability condition the
platform key already has. A key anything running as this app can reach
unattended defends a file, not a process — and against every adversary this
document already lists, it adds nothing.

What it would genuinely add is narrow: a file copied off the device and read
elsewhere, a phone with no screen lock, and crypto-shredding on delete. The
cost is about +1 MB downloaded and +2 MB installed on a 2 MB app, and a new
class of total loss — a Keystore key can be lost in the field, platform backup
is off, and there is no telemetry that would tell us it happened. Today a
database that will not open is a bug. Afterwards it would be somebody's
history.

The condition that reverses it is written down too: a key bound to the app
lock's user secret, once export has given the user a copy they control.

BRAND_GUIDE carried an artwork brief reading "explaining encrypted local data
storage" — a false claim waiting for somebody to draw it, on the one subject
where a padlock reads as a promise. Replaced with what is true and is a better
story anyway: the data never leaves, so there is no server to breach and
nothing to sell. SECURITY_CHECKLIST gains the row that would have caught it.

Nothing shipped ever claimed encryption; grep over app, core and domain for
strings and illustrations comes back empty. This closes the gap between that
and the documents.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-19 03:08:22 -05:00
null ad085fb4ce docs: correct 57 claims the code and tracker disagreed with
Every document in the tree audited against the source, the tracker and git
history, each finding then given to a second reader tasked with refuting it.
74 raised, 12 refuted, 57 applied. No code changed.

THE README DESCRIBED A SKELETON

Its Status table — the one place a claim about what is built is allowed to live
— still read "there is no usable app yet", with Not built against Room, the four
core screens, fertility and notifications, and No round run against QA. Five
batches had shipped and three QA rounds had run.

TWO DOCUMENTS WERE SILENTLY NEVER FIRING

architecture/README.md and design/README.md wrote Governs: as prose ("the Gradle
module graph", "the design tokens in core/designsystem"). Neither contains a
path token, so doc-triggers.py reduced them to globs matching nothing, and one
real glob apiece made them look path-governing rather than subject-governing —
the state the script's own header calls invisible. Editing a Room entity never
fired the document owning the migration table. Both now fire, proved by running
the script.

SECURITY.md CLAIMED FOUR UNBUILT PROTECTIONS

App lock listed among what works offline; biometric/PIN gating described as
protecting app launch; the incognito launcher as existing; Play Billing in the
third parties table without the "not yet integrated" marker its neighbours
carry. All are Batch 06/07 work.

The advertising boundary was overstated in SECURITY.md and the README alike:
both said the ads module declares no dependency and a guard proves it. There is
no ads module. The pre-declared ":core:ads" to emptySet() rule is stricter than
the sentence it replaced and matches nothing until Batch 07, which is why the
guard is proved by injection rather than trusted.

SMALLER, EACH A REAL TRAP

WORK_CYCLE.md pointed at docs/architecture/scripts/forgejo-issue.py, a template
path absent here — missed by doc-claims.sh, which reads backticked prose and not
fenced blocks. ClaudeReport.md's Round notes said "No rounds yet" after three
rounds because ClaudeQAPlan.md's after-a-round list never named that section;
the playbook is fixed first. The instrumented-test count was eight in three
places and is four. HISTORY.md said the repository had no code and that nothing
had been tried and dropped, when three approaches had.

DELIBERATELY UNCHANGED

ClaudeReport.md's last verified build SHA stays at 0451fbe — no round has run
since, and moving it would claim a verification nobody performed. Every
DEVELOPMENT_LOG entry stays as written.

Guards: ./gradlew check, schema-guard.sh, doc-claims.sh (235 claimed paths, all
present), doc-triggers.py, and a link sweep over 21 markdown files.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 16:33:14 -05:00
null 4eed14f059 chore: rename the project to Privacy: Period Tracker
"Period" was always a working name — PRODUCT_PLAN.md §55 said so. The real
identity arrived with the brand guide and artwork, and this makes the project
call itself by it.

The repository is renamed in place on Forgejo (null/Period ->
null/Privacy-Period-Tracker), which keeps all 30 commits, all 27 issues, all 8
milestones and the four severity labels — verified by counting them on both
sides rather than assuming a rename is lossless. The git remote follows in the
same breath, so this commit's automatic push is what proves the new URL works.

WHAT DELIBERATELY DID NOT MOVE

"Period" is the product name AND the central domain word, and a mass rename
would have turned the data model into nonsense. PeriodRecord, PeriodWriteResult,
confirmPeriodStart, the period_records table and the button that says "Started
period" all describe a menstrual period rather than a product, and all 239
references to them are untouched.

So are the Kotlin package and applicationId. dev.privacyllc.period already reads
correctly under the new name — privacyllc is the company, period is the app —
and changing it would rewrite 68 files, rename the Room schema directory and
break the hardcoded path in schema-guard.sh for no gain. period.db stays for a
sharper reason: renaming a database file orphans the data on every device that
already has it.

Sixteen files changed, and the diff is small on purpose.

THE NAME HAS A SPACE AND THE ARTWORK DOES NOT

Canonical is "Privacy: Period Tracker". The supplied wordmark sets it without
one, so logo.webp and banner.webp now disagree with every document and with the
app itself. BRAND_GUIDE.md §10 is updated to the space form and says plainly
that the drawn mark has not caught up. Filed separately rather than papered
over, because closing that gap needs an artist and not a rename.
2026-08-18 15:54:34 -05:00
null d03eecde31 docs: name not-yet-existing paths without backticks so doc-claims passes
doc-claims.sh reported 19 claimed paths that do not exist. Every one was a
deliberate forward reference — the planned modules in the architecture table,
the two documents the trust map records as absent on purpose, and the release
script Period declined.

A backticked path is read as a claim the file is there, so a document saying
"core/database does not exist yet" was asserting the opposite of what it meant.
docs/history/BATCH_LEDGER.md already records the idiom for this case; it is now
applied and stated where it is used, so the next forward reference does not
reintroduce the failure.

Also corrects WORK_CYCLE.md, inherited from the template, which pointed at a
scripts/release.sh this project does not have. A release here is a signed AAB
and a Play submission, so the security checklist carries that procedure.

doc-claims.sh now reports 152 claimed paths, all present, across 20 files.
2026-08-18 02:18:25 -05:00
null 96dd878ac5 chore: adopt the project template and add the Kotlin/Compose skeleton
Period was a bare directory holding one 2,527-line specification, with no git
repository, no tracker and no documentation convention. This is the adoption
from Projects/Template/START-HERE-New-Project.md, plus a project that compiles
so the hooks and future guards have something real to run against.

Documents. scaffold.sh created 19 paths, 0 skipped. The specification moved to
docs/planning/PRODUCT_PLAN.md unchanged in substance, with a status header; the
capitalised Docs/ is gone. Every scaffolded document was filled in for Period.
docs/OPERATIONS.md deleted — an offline app is not a deployed service.
DOC_TRUST_MAP.md written last, describing what is actually here, including what
this project deliberately does not have.

Code. Four Gradle modules. domain/cycle and domain/prediction are kotlin("jvm")
and cannot see the Android SDK, so the engine is testable without an emulator —
17 tests pass, 12 of them the acceptance cases from PRODUCT_PLAN.md §51.
BaselinePredictionEngine is a robust-median prototype and explicitly not the
product; it exists so Batch 02's replacement can be shown to be better rather
than merely different.

Versions verified against their official sources today rather than inherited
from the specification's own numbers, which that document asks for: Kotlin
2.4.10, AGP 9.3.1, Gradle 9.7.0, Compose BOM 2026.08.00, Room 2.8.4, Hilt
2.60.1. AGP 9 ships Kotlin built in, so org.jetbrains.kotlin.android is no
longer applied. compileSdk is 37 because current AndroidX requires it; targetSdk
stays 36, Play's floor from 2026-08-31, and the difference is deliberate.

Six scripts taken into scripts/; the rest declined and named in docs/TOOLS.md.
Three hooks in .githooks/, with pre-commit adapted to Gradle.

closes #1
closes #2
2026-08-18 02:16:47 -05:00