The question that decides whether a system can be depended on is not "does it
work" -- a demo answers that -- but which controls are present, asked before
something goes wrong. verify.sh reports which checks ran just now; backup.sh
proves one dump; the Command Center reports documents and tracker labels. None
of them says whether this project has backups AND has ever restored one AND has
somewhere errors go AND has an environment that is not production.
Four states, because flattening them is how a report starts lying:
measured observed here -- a file with a date, a variable that is set, a
command that answered
declared asserted in configuration, checked for shape and not for truth
n/a the project said the control does not apply. A library has no
uptime; saying so is an answer, not an omission
unknown expected and undeterminable. Never rendered as absent, because
"I could not tell" and "it is not there" send people to different
places
Reads BACKUP_DIR, BACKUP_NAME, HEALTHCHECK_BASE_URL, STATUS_HOST and
STATUS_CONTAINER from the scripts that own them, so the two cannot disagree
about which project this is. Writes nothing: a committed CONTROLS.md saying
"backups: ok" is a description of current state in a document, which is what the
batch ledger was and why it was archived.
Verified: exit 2 when nothing is declared and when a control name is unknown;
exit 0 for a library that declares only what applies, with seven n/a rows; exit
1 with three absent and one unknown; --quiet showing only rows needing
attention.
One bug that testing found and reading would not. GNU date parses relative
English, so `CONTROLS_LAST_RESTORE="last tuesday"` returned a real timestamp and
a plausible age -- a restore date the script invented. The shape is now required
before date sees it, and prose becomes unknown rather than a number.
closes#10
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
backup.sh says it outright -- it verifies the artefact, only a restore verifies
the backup -- and its header names this script as the missing half, with the
pg_restore command it should run. This is that command with the parts that stop
it being dangerous.
A dump pg_restore --list can read is a file with a table of contents, not a
database. Between those sit every reason a restore fails on the day it is
needed: a missing extension, an owner that does not exist, version skew, a dump
of the wrong database that reads perfectly. And the number nobody has and will
want badly: how long it takes. During an incident that decides whether you
restore or fail over, and it is unknowable from the file size. Printed every run.
**The dangerous part.** pg_restore --clean issues DROPs, and pointed at
production it obeys immediately and irreversibly. Handled by never accepting a
target: there is no --database flag, because naming the database is the mistake.
The script creates `restorecheck_<epoch>_<pid>`, restores into that, and drops it
from a trap so an interrupted run leaves no copy of production data behind.
Same argument status.sh makes for having no --host flag.
Shares BACKUP_DIR, BACKUP_NAME and BACKUP_MIN_TABLES with backup.sh rather than
taking its own, so the two cannot disagree about which series belongs to this
project.
Proved against a real PostgreSQL, not asserted -- GUARDS.md section 1:
exit 0 a real 3-table dump, minimum 1
exit 1 minimum raised to 99; a dump truncated to 2000 bytes; a zero-byte dump
exit 2 unconfigured (naming the missing value one at a time); server
unreachable
exit 0 --dry-run, always, contacting nothing
Two things that testing found and assertion would not. Every scratch database
was dropped, confirmed by querying pg_database afterwards. And --dry-run could
exit 1 on an empty dump, because the emptiness check ran before it; a mode whose
exit code depends on the state of the data is not a dry run, so the check moved
below and the dry run now notes the emptiness in its plan instead.
closes#7
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The basis for every project here was itself unversioned: no .git, no remote,
no history. Changes to it had no diff and no revert, and two of its own guards
could not run at all -- doc-claims.sh and doc-triggers.py both read git
history, so the script written to catch documentation drift could not be run
against the documents that define drift.
This is the tree as it stands, including work that until now existed only as
loose files on disk: WORK_CYCLE.md, TOOLS.md, the Portainer image-line fix in
deploy.py, the status vocabulary corrected to the four words the conformance
checker actually enforces, the Exempt: mechanism documented, and the Forgejo
instance named in README.md.
secrets.sh --tracked reports one candidate, migrate.sh:480. It is the comment
documenting the three Postgres credential shapes that script redacts, with
literal placeholders, and it is left alone deliberately: GUARDS.md section 2
is that a source-grep guard must tell code from the comment about code, and
deleting an explanation to quiet a scanner is the failure it names.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
null