Queue-North-Website/docs/architecture/GUARDS.md

151 lines
6.0 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

docs: adopt project template, retire the markdown backlog This repository is the one the template's README describes: 205 issues, zero milestones, and severity labels spelled "P0 Critical" / "P1 High" / "P2 Medium", which privacyllc.dev reports as NOT ADOPTED rather than as 87% complete. Six markdown records described the same work and none pointed at the tracker. Two of them said the project was in "Phase 5" while the code was at 0.9.3. Migrated, then deleted in this commit: FUTURE.md -> docs/history/BATCH_LEDGER.md (Archived). Its open items were all already filed as issues, so nothing needed migrating into the tracker HISTORY.md -> docs/history/DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md, verbatim, 0 lines lost DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md -> the same file, as a second labelled block. Not interleaved: the changelog has three duplicated version headings, so one date order would have implied more than the record supports PROJECT.md -> docs/planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md STRUCTURE.md -> the agent pipeline into README.md; its versioning rules retired BUILD_SUMMARY.md -> BATCH_LEDGER.md. Its embedded SQL schema deliberately NOT carried: it predated the UNIQUE constraint on leads.email, and server/index.js owns the schema SCRIPTS.md -> docs/TOOLS.md, corrected for the SSR + prerender build Moved with history (git detects all four as renames): OVERHAUL_PLAN.md, review.md, project-requirements.md, docs/zoho-setup.md Kept because this project earned them: the five-agent pipeline, the design system in OVERHAUL_PLAN.md (Status: Current, with a front-note saying which half is history), the positioning argument in REDESIGN_REVIEW.md, and REQUIREMENTS.md whole, including its change policy. Deleted from the template because they do not apply, each said out loud in DOC_TRUST_MAP.md: QA pass I (no money moves), the authorisation checklist group and the session-token row (no accounts, no sessions), and one PRECAUTIONARY paragraph in SECURITY.md about holding credentials on behalf of users — there are none, and PROJECT_PLAN.md records accounts as out of scope. Pass H was kept and rewritten: its authorisation half does not apply, its what-a-stranger-can- reach half is the most exposed surface here. Also removed: main.js, the old static site's hash router, referenced by nothing and preserved in .drop/; and test-results/.last-run.json, a May Playwright artifact reading {"status":"failed"} for a suite that does not exist. The repository was made private on Forgejo before this commit. That is what let the internal history be committed rather than exempted — null/fruit-fall is already private and reports normally. Two defects found on the way in and fixed here: zoho-setup.md told admins to edit `server/zoho/`, a directory that has never existed in any commit (the mapping is in server/index.js), and README.md's route list still advertised /8x8, removed at 0.6.6, while omitting /privacy-policy. Branding: icon.webp and logo.webp converted from this project's own marks in assets/. banner.webp is absent and is filed as an issue rather than faked. Verified: verify.sh 3/3, doc-claims 71 claimed paths all present, backup and a first-ever restore of the live leads database (2 tables, 3 rows, under 1s). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 01:19:02 -05:00
# Guards — how to write a check that actually checks
```
Status: Current
Owner: _null
Last reviewed: 2026-08-18
Governs: scripts/verify.d/**, .githooks/** — structural tests, source-grep
assertions, probes, and any check whose passing is taken as evidence
Review trigger: A guard is found to have been passing while the thing it guards
was broken; a new class of check is added to the suite.
```
fix(security): stop secrets.sh flagging every prerendered page, and clear the dangling doc claims secrets.sh --built reported ten credentials in dist/ and all ten were the same false positive: the template's user:pass@host pattern reads the schema.org JSON-LD on every prerendered page — //queuenorth.com"},"areaServed":{"@ — as a host, a password and an @. One more finding for every page added, which is the noise that turns a scanner into something people mute. Quotes, braces, commas and angle brackets cannot occur in a real userinfo component. Checked against a database URL with an inline password, one percent-encoded, and a git remote carrying a token — all three still caught, all ten false positives gone, and the historical Zoho leak from 033bdf6 still caught when replayed. The first version of that fix wrote its three test cases out literally in the header, and --tracked then reported two credentials in the scanner itself. The placeholders now use angle brackets, which are in the exclusion class the comment is describing — so the examples cannot match the pattern they illustrate. Same shape as the trap DOC_TRUST_MAP.md records about Exempt: lines. doc-claims: 240 claimed paths, all present, up from 5 dangling. DOC_TRUST_MAP was claiming banner.webp exists while saying it does not; GUARDS.md pointed at prove-guard.sh, which this project declined. docs/history/ is excluded rather than corrected — its entries name files that existed when they were written, and editing an append-only log to satisfy a present-tense check is a category error. TOOLS.md records the exclusion and why. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 01:40:46 -05:00
> **prove-guard.sh is not in this repository.** It lives in the template at
> `~/.openclaw/Projects/Template/docs/architecture/scripts/`, and this project
> declined it on adoption — its guards are three shell scripts in
> `scripts/verify.d/` that fail visibly on their own. It is named without
> backticks throughout for that reason. §1 below still applies and was performed
> by hand on every guard here; `docs/history/DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md` for 2026-08-18
> records how each was broken and what it did.
docs: adopt project template, retire the markdown backlog This repository is the one the template's README describes: 205 issues, zero milestones, and severity labels spelled "P0 Critical" / "P1 High" / "P2 Medium", which privacyllc.dev reports as NOT ADOPTED rather than as 87% complete. Six markdown records described the same work and none pointed at the tracker. Two of them said the project was in "Phase 5" while the code was at 0.9.3. Migrated, then deleted in this commit: FUTURE.md -> docs/history/BATCH_LEDGER.md (Archived). Its open items were all already filed as issues, so nothing needed migrating into the tracker HISTORY.md -> docs/history/DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md, verbatim, 0 lines lost DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md -> the same file, as a second labelled block. Not interleaved: the changelog has three duplicated version headings, so one date order would have implied more than the record supports PROJECT.md -> docs/planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md STRUCTURE.md -> the agent pipeline into README.md; its versioning rules retired BUILD_SUMMARY.md -> BATCH_LEDGER.md. Its embedded SQL schema deliberately NOT carried: it predated the UNIQUE constraint on leads.email, and server/index.js owns the schema SCRIPTS.md -> docs/TOOLS.md, corrected for the SSR + prerender build Moved with history (git detects all four as renames): OVERHAUL_PLAN.md, review.md, project-requirements.md, docs/zoho-setup.md Kept because this project earned them: the five-agent pipeline, the design system in OVERHAUL_PLAN.md (Status: Current, with a front-note saying which half is history), the positioning argument in REDESIGN_REVIEW.md, and REQUIREMENTS.md whole, including its change policy. Deleted from the template because they do not apply, each said out loud in DOC_TRUST_MAP.md: QA pass I (no money moves), the authorisation checklist group and the session-token row (no accounts, no sessions), and one PRECAUTIONARY paragraph in SECURITY.md about holding credentials on behalf of users — there are none, and PROJECT_PLAN.md records accounts as out of scope. Pass H was kept and rewritten: its authorisation half does not apply, its what-a-stranger-can- reach half is the most exposed surface here. Also removed: main.js, the old static site's hash router, referenced by nothing and preserved in .drop/; and test-results/.last-run.json, a May Playwright artifact reading {"status":"failed"} for a suite that does not exist. The repository was made private on Forgejo before this commit. That is what let the internal history be committed rather than exempted — null/fruit-fall is already private and reports normally. Two defects found on the way in and fixed here: zoho-setup.md told admins to edit `server/zoho/`, a directory that has never existed in any commit (the mapping is in server/index.js), and README.md's route list still advertised /8x8, removed at 0.6.6, while omitting /privacy-policy. Branding: icon.webp and logo.webp converted from this project's own marks in assets/. banner.webp is absent and is filed as an issue rather than faked. Verified: verify.sh 3/3, doc-claims 71 claimed paths all present, backup and a first-ever restore of the live leads database (2 tables, 3 rows, under 1s). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 01:19:02 -05:00
A guard that cannot fail is worse than no guard, because it is trusted. Every
rule here was learned by finding one that had been green for months over
something broken.
## 1. Prove the guard fails before you believe it passes
The one discipline that matters most, and it takes thirty seconds:
```bash
cp src/lib/thing.ts /tmp/thing.bak
# break exactly the thing the test protects
sed -i 's/if (body.error)/if (false)/' src/lib/thing.ts
npx vitest run tests/thing.test.ts # expect: exactly one failure
cp /tmp/thing.bak src/lib/thing.ts
npx vitest run tests/thing.test.ts # expect: green again
```
**Exactly one** is the part people skip. If breaking the guard's target fails
three tests, two of them are coincidental and will mask a real regression later.
If it fails none, the guard is decoration — and you have just learned that for
the price of one `sed`.
fix(security): stop secrets.sh flagging every prerendered page, and clear the dangling doc claims secrets.sh --built reported ten credentials in dist/ and all ten were the same false positive: the template's user:pass@host pattern reads the schema.org JSON-LD on every prerendered page — //queuenorth.com"},"areaServed":{"@ — as a host, a password and an @. One more finding for every page added, which is the noise that turns a scanner into something people mute. Quotes, braces, commas and angle brackets cannot occur in a real userinfo component. Checked against a database URL with an inline password, one percent-encoded, and a git remote carrying a token — all three still caught, all ten false positives gone, and the historical Zoho leak from 033bdf6 still caught when replayed. The first version of that fix wrote its three test cases out literally in the header, and --tracked then reported two credentials in the scanner itself. The placeholders now use angle brackets, which are in the exclusion class the comment is describing — so the examples cannot match the pattern they illustrate. Same shape as the trap DOC_TRUST_MAP.md records about Exempt: lines. doc-claims: 240 claimed paths, all present, up from 5 dangling. DOC_TRUST_MAP was claiming banner.webp exists while saying it does not; GUARDS.md pointed at prove-guard.sh, which this project declined. docs/history/ is excluded rather than corrected — its entries name files that existed when they were written, and editing an append-only log to satisfy a present-tense check is a category error. TOOLS.md records the exclusion and why. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 01:40:46 -05:00
prove-guard.sh performs exactly this, which removes the two ways it
docs: adopt project template, retire the markdown backlog This repository is the one the template's README describes: 205 issues, zero milestones, and severity labels spelled "P0 Critical" / "P1 High" / "P2 Medium", which privacyllc.dev reports as NOT ADOPTED rather than as 87% complete. Six markdown records described the same work and none pointed at the tracker. Two of them said the project was in "Phase 5" while the code was at 0.9.3. Migrated, then deleted in this commit: FUTURE.md -> docs/history/BATCH_LEDGER.md (Archived). Its open items were all already filed as issues, so nothing needed migrating into the tracker HISTORY.md -> docs/history/DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md, verbatim, 0 lines lost DEVELOPMENT_LOG.md -> the same file, as a second labelled block. Not interleaved: the changelog has three duplicated version headings, so one date order would have implied more than the record supports PROJECT.md -> docs/planning/PROJECT_PLAN.md STRUCTURE.md -> the agent pipeline into README.md; its versioning rules retired BUILD_SUMMARY.md -> BATCH_LEDGER.md. Its embedded SQL schema deliberately NOT carried: it predated the UNIQUE constraint on leads.email, and server/index.js owns the schema SCRIPTS.md -> docs/TOOLS.md, corrected for the SSR + prerender build Moved with history (git detects all four as renames): OVERHAUL_PLAN.md, review.md, project-requirements.md, docs/zoho-setup.md Kept because this project earned them: the five-agent pipeline, the design system in OVERHAUL_PLAN.md (Status: Current, with a front-note saying which half is history), the positioning argument in REDESIGN_REVIEW.md, and REQUIREMENTS.md whole, including its change policy. Deleted from the template because they do not apply, each said out loud in DOC_TRUST_MAP.md: QA pass I (no money moves), the authorisation checklist group and the session-token row (no accounts, no sessions), and one PRECAUTIONARY paragraph in SECURITY.md about holding credentials on behalf of users — there are none, and PROJECT_PLAN.md records accounts as out of scope. Pass H was kept and rewritten: its authorisation half does not apply, its what-a-stranger-can- reach half is the most exposed surface here. Also removed: main.js, the old static site's hash router, referenced by nothing and preserved in .drop/; and test-results/.last-run.json, a May Playwright artifact reading {"status":"failed"} for a suite that does not exist. The repository was made private on Forgejo before this commit. That is what let the internal history be committed rather than exempted — null/fruit-fall is already private and reports normally. Two defects found on the way in and fixed here: zoho-setup.md told admins to edit `server/zoho/`, a directory that has never existed in any commit (the mapping is in server/index.js), and README.md's route list still advertised /8x8, removed at 0.6.6, while omitting /privacy-policy. Branding: icon.webp and logo.webp converted from this project's own marks in assets/. banner.webp is absent and is filed as an issue rather than faked. Verified: verify.sh 3/3, doc-claims 71 claimed paths all present, backup and a first-ever restore of the live leads database (2 tables, 3 rows, under 1s). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-18 01:19:02 -05:00
gets skipped: the restore is a `trap`, so an interrupted run cannot leave the
code broken, and the failure count comes from the runner's own summary rather
than from eyeballing red — one failing test is routinely reported on half a
dozen lines, and counting those calls a clean result six coincidental
failures.
Do this when you write a guard, and again when you change what it guards. A
test written alongside the code it tests has never been observed failing.
## 2. A source-grep guard must tell code from the comment about code
Structural tests that assert a file does *not* contain some pattern will match
the docblock explaining why that pattern is forbidden. So the clearest possible
comment breaks the test, and the obvious fix is to delete the explanation.
Strip comments first:
```ts
const codeOf = (path: string) =>
readFileSync(path, "utf8")
.split("\n")
.filter((line) => !/^\s*(\*|\/\/|\{\/\*)/.test(line))
.join("\n");
expect(codeOf("src/lib/thing.ts")).not.toContain("dangerouslySetInnerHTML");
```
Otherwise the guard quietly punishes documenting the rule it exists to enforce —
which is exactly backwards, because the comment is how the next person learns
the rule at all.
## 3. Pin the behaviour, not the spelling
A guard should fail when the protected behaviour breaks and stay quiet
otherwise. One that asserts on a variable name fails on a rename that changed
nothing.
```ts
// Brittle: breaks when the variable is renamed, while the fallback it protects
// is untouched.
expect(route).toContain("readAsset(project.forgejoRepo");
// Pins the behaviour: the route fetches through the wrapper that tries both
// spellings, and never through the raw reader.
expect(route).toMatch(/readAsset\(\s*\w+,\s*ASSETS\[which\]\s*\)/);
expect(body).not.toContain("readFileBytes(");
```
A guard that fails on changes it does not care about is one people learn to edit
rather than heed, and the edit is usually deletion.
## 4. A negative result is only as good as the probe that produced it
"The check found nothing" and "the check did not run" are different facts, and
they look identical from the outside. Before reporting an absence, prove the
instrument worked:
```bash
# Not this alone — an unreadable file produces the same silence as an unset key
grep -c '^WANTED=' /proc/$PID/environ
# Establish the read succeeded first
tr '\0' '\n' < /proc/$PID/environ | grep -c . # 0 here means "could not read"
```
This is the confident-absence failure one level up: the same trap as a screen
rendering a failed query as a count of zero, applied to your own diagnosis.
## 5. A guard that is often wrong is worse than none
A check with a high false-positive rate trains everybody to skip its output,
including on the day it is right.
One written for this template flagged **684 of 1142** candidates on its first
run. That was not 684 findings, it was a broken heuristic — and shipping it
would have taught its readers that the check is noise. Two rounds of narrowing
brought it to 17 of 363, all of them real.
If a new guard's first run is loud, tune it until it is quiet before anybody
relies on it. Report the false-positive rate you settled at, so the next person
knows what silence is worth.
## 6. Guards belong before the artifact exists
A check that runs after publication catches the problem once it is somewhere it
cannot be taken back from: the tag is in the registry, and refusing the commit
afterwards leaves git with no record of it.
Order the gates so the expensive, irreversible step is last — preconditions,
guards, build, verify the built thing is what was asked for, publish, and record
it last of all.
## 7. When the gate finds something that invalidates the operation, stop
Printing a warning and continuing produces the worst outcome available: the bad
thing happens *and* a reassuring summary appears above it.
The question is not how bad the finding is. It is **whether it invalidates what
the operation claims**:
- A release whose test gate skipped half the suite — a release claims to be
tested. **Refuse.**
- A backup written to a group-readable directory — the backup is still a
backup. **Warn.**
Escape hatches are fine, and they have to be asked for by name, never be the
default, and say plainly what is being given up.