diff --git a/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md b/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md index 4c3b43c..2fab1e7 100644 --- a/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md +++ b/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md @@ -31,9 +31,9 @@ This dossier documents the **InfraFabric microlab**: a functioning single-shard | Core claim | Proof (artifacts) | Limitation (scope / boundary) | |---|---|---| -| **A) Traceability is safety.** High‑stakes agents cannot be trusted without a verifiable history of what happened (request → retrieval → decision → output). | **IF.TTT + evidence bundles**: the IF.emotion trace protocol ships a portable tarball + manifest + verifier steps that a third party can run.
Start here: [IF.emotion trace protocol (v3.3, styled) — end‑to‑end verification appendix](https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/IF_EMOTION_DEBUGGING_TRACE_WHITEPAPER_v3.3_STYLED.md). | **Microlab / single shard.** Proven in a single-host environment. Completeness is bounded by explicit witness boundaries; PQ is anchored at registry time (not necessarily on every hot-path artifact). No public append‑only transparency log yet. | -| **B) Governance requires plurality.** A single model acting as “the judge” is brittle; adversarial viewpoints and escalation are required. | **IF.BIAS → IF.GUARD**: risk preflight sizes councils and escalates; councils preserve dissent and veto paths; decisions are traced. Pointers: IF.BIAS, IF.GUARD, IF.5W sections. | **Cost / latency tradeoffs.** Multi-seat governance is reserved for higher-stakes decisions; low-stakes paths use smaller councils or fast-track gates. | -| **C) Context is the best firewall.** Static filters fail; security must distinguish “reference” vs “leak” and “discussion” vs “exfiltration”. | **IF.ARMOUR + IF.YOLOGUARD**: epistemic/anomaly detection primitives and secret/relationship screening patterns (architecture + docs). | **Domain specificity.** Calibrated for concrete security surfaces (secrets/PII/prompt injection); generalizing to broader “harmful intent” is an open research vector. | +| **A) Traceability is safety.** High‑stakes agents cannot be trusted without a verifiable history of what happened (request → retrieval → decision → output). | **IF.TTT + evidence bundle + verifier**
- Paper: [IF.emotion trace protocol (v3.3, styled)](https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/IF_EMOTION_DEBUGGING_TRACE_WHITEPAPER_v3.3_STYLED.md)
- Verifier: `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/iftrace.py`
- Reference bundle: `emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz` | **Microlab / single shard.** Proven in a single-host environment. Completeness is bounded by explicit witness boundaries; PQ is anchored at registry time (not necessarily on every hot-path artifact). No public append‑only transparency log yet. | +| **B) Governance requires plurality.** A single model acting as “the judge” is brittle; adversarial viewpoints and escalation are required. | **IF.BIAS → IF.GUARD**
- IF.BIAS: risk preflight sizes councils and escalates
- IF.GUARD: councils preserve dissent and veto paths
- IF.5W: structured inquiry briefs for councils | **Cost / latency tradeoffs.** Multi-seat governance is reserved for higher-stakes decisions; low-stakes paths use smaller councils or fast-track gates. | +| **C) Context is the best firewall.** Static filters fail; security must distinguish “reference” vs “leak” and “discussion” vs “exfiltration”. | **IF.ARMOUR + IF.YOLOGUARD**
- IF.ARMOUR: epistemic coherence checks (detective layer)
- IF.YOLOGUARD: secret/relationship screening primitives | **Domain specificity.** Calibrated for concrete security surfaces (secrets/PII/prompt injection); generalizing to broader “harmful intent” is an open research vector. | ### Rosetta Stone (Closest Analog, not “equals”) @@ -322,13 +322,13 @@ This is the connective tissue for the corpus: each paper points to the next laye ```mermaid flowchart TD - MASTER["Master Whitepaper\nINFRAFABRIC_MASTER_WHITEPAPER"] --> TTT["IF_TTT_THE_SKELETON_OF_EVERYTHING"] + MASTER["Master Whitepaper
INFRAFABRIC_MASTER_WHITEPAPER"] --> TTT["IF_TTT_THE_SKELETON_OF_EVERYTHING"] MASTER --> GUARD["IF_GUARD_COUNCIL_FRAMEWORK"] MASTER --> PACKET["IF_PACKET_TRANSPORT_FRAMEWORK"] GUARD --> FIVEW["IF_5W_STRUCTURED_INQUIRY_FRAMEWORK"] TTT --> STORY["IF_STORY_NARRATIVE_LOGGING"] TTT --> EMOTION["IF_EMOTION_WHITEPAPER"] - EMOTION --> EMOOPS["emo-social runtime\n(trace_log + RAG)"] + EMOTION --> EMOOPS["emo-social runtime
(trace_log + RAG)"] PACKET --> SWARM["IF_SWARM-S2-COMMS"] ``` @@ -379,8 +379,7 @@ Next steps (TTT hardening): enforce “cite only retrieved chunks” in response _Source: `Danny Stocker - CV - InfraFabric.pdf`_ **Contact** -- Email: danny.stocker@gmail.com -- Phone: +(33) 6 52 48 90 17 +- Email: ds@infrafabric.io - Web: https://digital-lab.ca/dannystocker **Headline** @@ -439,6 +438,10 @@ InfraFabric is the operating system that turns AI from a chatbot into a reliable ## Index +- Submission editions (recommended first read): + - [Submission Edition (Clean)](DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md) + - [Data‑Driven Technical Report (Microlab)](DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md) + - [00. The Bridge: Submission Pack (Reviewer Orientation)](#bridge-submission-pack) ### External audit artifacts (public, reviewer-friendly) @@ -446,6 +449,7 @@ InfraFabric is the operating system that turns AI from a chatbot into a reliable These artifacts are published in a dedicated repo and mirrored to a static directory for reliable downloads (avoids intermittent Forgejo “raw” quirks). - Public static mirror (preferred): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/` +- Dossier viewer (renders markdown + anchors): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/dossier_site/index.html` - Source repo: `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted` Key artifacts: @@ -3445,7 +3449,7 @@ Special thanks to: **License:** Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) **Code:** Available at https://git.infrafabric.io/dannystocker -**Contact:** InfraFabric Project (danny.stocker@gmail.com) +**Contact:** InfraFabric Project (ds@infrafabric.io) --- @@ -6854,7 +6858,7 @@ The InfraFabric project is open research—all methodologies, frameworks, and va **License:** Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) **Code & Data:** Available at https://git.infrafabric.io/dannystocker -**Contact:** Danny Stocker (danny.stocker@gmail.com) +**Contact:** Danny Stocker (ds@infrafabric.io) **arXiv Category:** cs.AI, cs.SE, cs.HC --- @@ -31072,12 +31076,12 @@ IF.bus mirrors this architecture for AI agent coordination and financial service ```mermaid flowchart TD - BUS["IF.bus motherboard v2.0"] --> CHIPS["Core chips\nIF.guard • IF.witness • IF.yologuard • IF.emotion"] - BUS --> LANES["Bus lanes\nDDS • Redis pub/sub"] - BUS --> SLOTS["Expansion slots\nif.api adapters (9)"] + BUS["IF.bus motherboard v2.0"] --> CHIPS["Core chips
IF.guard • IF.witness • IF.yologuard • IF.emotion"] + BUS --> LANES["Bus lanes
DDS • Redis pub/sub"] + BUS --> SLOTS["Expansion slots
if.api adapters (9)"] BUS --> FIRMWARE["IF.ground firmware"] BUS --> POWER["IF.connect power"] - SLOTS --> SLOT9["African fintech slot\n4 adapters"] + SLOTS --> SLOT9["African fintech slot
4 adapters"] CHIPS --> TTT["IF.TTT | Distributed Ledger traceability"] ``` diff --git a/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md b/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6fd9b52 --- /dev/null +++ b/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md @@ -0,0 +1,193 @@ +# InfraFabric Dossier — Data‑Driven Technical Report (Microlab) v1.0 + +**Subject:** Measured characteristics of the IF.TTT trace pipeline (microlab) +**Protocol:** IF.TTT.dossier.metrics +**Status:** TECHNICAL REPORT (BORING ON PURPOSE) +**Date:** 2025-12-22 +**Citation:** `if://doc/INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN/v1.0` +**Author:** Danny Stocker (`ds@infrafabric.io`) +**Web:** https://infrafabric.io + +This edition intentionally avoids narrative framing. It reports what can be measured, what cannot, and what is planned. + +**Canonical (static mirror):** `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md` +**Repo source:** `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted/src/branch/main/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md` +**SHA256 (sidecar):** `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md.sha256` +**Verify:** `curl -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md' -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md.sha256' && sha256sum -c DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_DATA_DRIVEN_EDITION.md.sha256` + +--- + +## 1) Scope + +This report covers: + +- the IF.emotion evidence bundle format (tar.gz + manifest) +- measured latencies recorded in trace events (`auth_ms`, `rag_ms`, `llm_ms`) for a small sample of published bundles +- storage footprint of published bundles + +This report does **not** claim: + +- production scalability +- clinical validity +- “truth” of model outputs (only provenance of what the system did) + +--- + +## 2) Data Sources (Public, Verifiable) + +All artifacts referenced here are publicly downloadable and hash-verifiable. + +Static mirror (preferred): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/` +Source repo: `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted` + +### 2.1 Evidence bundles used in this report + +| Trace | Bundle | SHA256 sidecar | +|---|---|---| +| `016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz.sha256` | +| `0642c357-7f8d-4eb5-9643-1992e7ee14a9` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_0642c357-7f8d-4eb5-9643-1992e7ee14a9.tar.gz` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_0642c357-7f8d-4eb5-9643-1992e7ee14a9.tar.gz.sha256` | +| `09aad3e1-f420-451e-a189-e86f68073dc0` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_09aad3e1-f420-451e-a189-e86f68073dc0.tar.gz` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_09aad3e1-f420-451e-a189-e86f68073dc0.tar.gz.sha256` | +| `96700e8e-6a83-445e-86f7-06905c500146` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_96700e8e-6a83-445e-86f7-06905c500146.tar.gz` | `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_96700e8e-6a83-445e-86f7-06905c500146.tar.gz.sha256` | + +### 2.2 Verification command (bundle transport integrity) + +```bash +curl -fsSLO '' -fsSLO '.sha256' && sha256sum -c '.sha256' +``` + +### 2.3 Verifier tool + +- Static: `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/iftrace.py` +- Repo: `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted/raw/branch/main/iftrace.py` + +Run: + +```bash +python3 iftrace.py verify '.tar.gz' +``` + +--- + +## 3) Measurement Method (How Numbers Are Obtained) + +For each bundle: + +1. extract `payload/trace_events.jsonl` +2. read per-event `event.data`: + - `request_received.data.auth_ms` + - `retrieval_done.data.rag_ms` (when present) + - `model_done.data.llm_ms` (when present) +3. treat these values as **self-reported microlab timings** (they are not externally attested) + +Key point: even if the numbers are not “audited”, the bundle makes them *replayable* and makes the presence/absence of events *auditable*. + +--- + +## 4) Architecture Boundary (Where Guarantees Begin) + +```mermaid +flowchart TB + U[User] -->|HTTPS| E[Edge] + E --> B[Backend Witness Boundary] + + B --> R[Retrieval] + B --> P[Prompt] + B --> M[Model] + B --> X[Postprocess] + + B --> T1["REQ_SEEN ledger
(hourly JSONL)"] + B --> T2["Trace events
(hash chain JSONL)"] + B --> T3["Signed summary
(output hash + head attestation)"] + + T1 --> H["Signed Merkle head
(per hour)"] + T2 --> S["Trace head
(event_hash)"] + + H --> BUNDLE["Evidence bundle
(tar.gz + manifest)"] + S --> BUNDLE + T3 --> BUNDLE + + BUNDLE --> MIRROR["Static mirror
(public download)"] +``` + +Interpretation: integrity begins at the backend witness boundary; completeness is meaningful at and after that boundary until edge witnessing exists. + +--- + +## 5) Observed Sample Metrics (N=4 Bundles) + +### 5.1 Bundle sizes (storage footprint) + +| Trace | Outcome | Bundle size | +|---|---|---:| +| `016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1` | full trace (retrieval + model) | 82,010 bytes | +| `0642c357-7f8d-4eb5-9643-1992e7ee14a9` | full trace (retrieval + model) | 5,515 bytes | +| `09aad3e1-f420-451e-a189-e86f68073dc0` | full trace (retrieval + model) | 71,817 bytes | +| `96700e8e-6a83-445e-86f7-06905c500146` | guard short-circuit (no retrieval/model) | 82,410 bytes | + +Notes: + +- N is small; treat these as indicative examples, not stable distributions. +- The short-circuit bundle being large indicates that “blocked paths” can still carry substantial evidence payloads (depending on included artifacts). + +### 5.2 Latency fields recorded in trace events + +| Trace | `auth_ms` | `rag_ms` | `llm_ms` | `retrieved_count` | Notes | +|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---| +| `016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1` | 3 | 1107 | 10550 | 1 | request → retrieval → model | +| `0642c357-7f8d-4eb5-9643-1992e7ee14a9` | 4 | 383 | 12287 | 2 | request → retrieval → model | +| `09aad3e1-f420-451e-a189-e86f68073dc0` | 4 | 1377 | 17879 | 2 | request → retrieval → model | +| `96700e8e-6a83-445e-86f7-06905c500146` | 5 | (n/a) | (n/a) | (n/a) | guard short-circuit reason: `self_harm_signal` | + +Derived from the sample (successful traces only; N=3): + +- `rag_ms`: min 383, median 1107, max 1377 +- `llm_ms`: min 10550, median 12287, max 17879 + +--- + +## 6) What This Sample Demonstrates + +From the published bundles, an external reviewer can verify (cryptographically / structurally): + +- the chain-of-custody wiring exists (hash chain + signed summary + inclusion proof) +- “short-circuit” decisions are still witnessed and included in the trace log (a critical property for dispute resolution) + +An external reviewer cannot verify (from the bundle alone): + +- the correctness of the output in the outside world +- the completeness of events *before* the backend witness boundary (edge drops / load balancer denials) +- the integrity of local keys (key custody, rotation, compromise response) + +--- + +## 7) Engineering Roadmap (Metrics-Driven) + +This roadmap is written as measurable deliverables. + +### 7.1 Key management hardening + +- Add explicit key separation: `IF_REQ_SEEN_HMAC_KEY` must not fall back to signing secret. +- Document key rotation procedure and compromise response. +- Optional: HSM/TPM signing for production deployments. + +### 7.2 Edge witnessing (completeness boundary expansion) + +- Implement edge request attempt ledger (cryptographic, not just web logs). +- Publish a “completeness SLO” (e.g., signed head anchored every N minutes or every N requests). + +### 7.3 Time and truncation defenses + +- Add monotonic counters (per trace and per ledger hour). +- Anchor chain heads periodically to reduce tail truncation risk window. + +### 7.4 Scale testing harness + +- Replay harness that runs the verifier across 1000+ generated traces (including failures) and publishes summary metrics. + +--- + +## 8) Companion Documents + +- Full dossier (uncut): `DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md` +- IF.emotion trace protocol (detailed, with walkthrough): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/IF_EMOTION_DEBUGGING_TRACE_WHITEPAPER_v3.3_STYLED.md` +- Evidence bundles directory: `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/` diff --git a/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md b/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c49619f --- /dev/null +++ b/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md @@ -0,0 +1,207 @@ +# InfraFabric Dossier — Submission Edition (Clean) v1.0 + +**Subject:** Safety-first agent runtime with verifiable provenance (microlab) +**Protocol:** IF.TTT.dossier.submission +**Status:** SUBMISSION EDITION (CLEAN) +**Date:** 2025-12-22 +**Citation:** `if://doc/INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION/v1.0` +**Author:** Danny Stocker (`ds@infrafabric.io`) +**Web:** https://infrafabric.io + +> The model’s answer is ephemeral. The trace is the product. If you can’t prove what happened, you are not running an AI system — you are running a scripted reality show. + +**Canonical (static mirror):** `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md` +**Repo source:** `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted/src/branch/main/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md` +**SHA256 (sidecar):** `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md.sha256` +**Verify:** `curl -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md' -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md.sha256' && sha256sum -c DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER_SUBMISSION_EDITION.md.sha256` + +**Read this if you have 15 minutes:** start at “Independent Verification (One Trace)”, run the commands, then skim “Boundaries & Limitations”. +**Read this if you have 60 minutes:** add “Architecture” + “Threat Model”. +**For full lab notes / uncut corpus:** see `DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md` (≈1.5MB). + +--- + +## 1) Technical Disclosure (AI-Native Implementation) + +This project follows an Operator-as-Architect workflow: I define constraints, interfaces, and verification hooks; LLMs generate implementation code under supervision. The system is therefore evaluated as: + +- **Architecture + specifications:** authored by me (the claims in this submission reference verification paths). +- **Code implementation:** LLM-assisted and treated as *untrusted until audited*; the trace protocol is designed to make that audit possible. + +--- + +## 2) What This Is (And What It Is Not) + +**This is:** a working microlab proving that agentic systems can ship **portable, third‑party verifiable evidence bundles** for disputed behaviors (request → retrieval → decision → output). +**This is not:** a claim that outputs are “true”, a claim of clinical efficacy, or a claim of production scale. + +--- + +## 3) Core Claims, Proofs, Boundaries + +| Core claim | Proof (artifact) | Boundary / limitation | +|---|---|---| +| **A) Traceability is a safety primitive.** High‑stakes agent actions require verifiable provenance. | IF.emotion trace protocol + evidence bundle + verifier (see §5). | **Microlab / single shard.** Guarantees begin at the backend witness boundary; edge completeness is future work. | +| **B) Governance needs structured dissent.** One-model “judge” patterns are brittle. | IF.BIAS (risk preflight) + IF.GUARD (council with required dissent seat) traced via IF.TTT. | **Cost/latency.** Multi-seat governance is reserved for higher-stakes decisions; low-stakes paths stay fast. | +| **C) Context is a security control.** Static filters fail; provenance + coherence checks reduce unsafe drift. | IF.ARMOUR (coherence/detective layer) + IF.YOLOGUARD (secret/relationship screening) integrated into the pipeline. | **Domain calibration.** Strongest for concrete surfaces (secrets/PII/prompt injection); general harmful-intent is open research. | + +--- + +## 4) Prior Art (Where This Fits) + +InfraFabric is not “inventing audit logs”. It adapts known integrity patterns to a different object: + +- **SLSA / SBOM / in-toto / Sigstore**: provenance for *software artifacts* → InfraFabric applies provenance discipline to *semantic decisions*, retrieval lineage, and agent actions. +- **Certificate Transparency (CT)**: append-only Merkle logging → InfraFabric borrows “inclusion proof” thinking for bounded completeness (`REQ_SEEN`). +- **Event sourcing / OpenTelemetry**: observability → InfraFabric adds a **verifier-oriented evidence bundle** that can be audited without trusting the operator. +- **W3C PROV (conceptually)**: provenance graphs → InfraFabric focuses on portable, hash-addressed artifacts with explicit boundaries and replay hooks. + +The key differentiator is not “we log more”. It is: **we ship a dispute bundle that a hostile reviewer can verify.** + +--- + +## 5) Independent Verification (One Trace, End-to-End) + +This is the minimal “receipt” test: download one evidence bundle, verify transport integrity, then verify the internal chain-of-custody. + +### 5.1 Public artifacts (preferred links) + +Static mirror (preferred for reviewers): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/` +Source repo (canonical): `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted` + +Reference proof bundle: + +- Bundle (static): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz` +- Bundle SHA256 (static): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz.sha256` +- Bundle (repo): `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted/raw/branch/main/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz` + +Verifier: + +- `iftrace.py` (static): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/iftrace.py` +- `iftrace.py` (repo): `https://git.infrafabric.io/danny/hosted/raw/branch/main/iftrace.py` + +### 5.2 Verify transport integrity (hash) + +```bash +curl -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz' \ + -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz.sha256' +sha256sum -c 'emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz.sha256' +``` + +### 5.3 Verify internal chain-of-custody + +```bash +curl -fsSLO 'https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/iftrace.py' +python3 iftrace.py verify 'emo_trace_payload_016cca78-6f9d-4ffe-aec0-99792d383ca1.tar.gz' +``` + +The verifier checks: + +- `trace_events.jsonl` forms a hash chain (`prev_hash` → `event_hash`) +- `req_seen_inclusion_proof.json` verifies against the signed Merkle head (bounded completeness for that hour) +- `ttt_signed_record.json` binds output hash + chain head and verifies signature +- the bundle manifest hashes match the extracted artifacts + +### 5.4 What you should see + +You should be able to verify, from raw artifacts inside the tarball, at minimum: + +- `request_received` (auth/provider/model intent) +- `retrieval_done` (retrieval ids + `rag_ms`) +- `prompt_built` (prompt hash) +- `model_done` (`llm_ms`, model/provider) +- `trace_finalizing` (chain head) +- `response.json` (the actual assistant output bytes whose hash is bound in the signed summary) + +If any element is missing or fails verification, the system is explicitly “not proven”. + +--- + +## 6) Architecture (Where Guarantees Begin) + +This diagram shows the system boundary that the protocol currently guarantees. + +```mermaid +flowchart TB + U[User] -->|HTTPS| E[Edge] + E --> B[Backend Witness Boundary] + + B --> R[Retrieval] + B --> P[Prompt] + B --> M[Model] + B --> X[Postprocess] + + B --> T1["REQ_SEEN ledger
(hourly JSONL)"] + B --> T2["Trace events
(hash chain JSONL)"] + B --> T3["Signed summary
(output hash + head attestation)"] + + T1 --> H["Signed Merkle head
(per hour)"] + T2 --> S["Trace head
(event_hash)"] + + H --> BUNDLE["Evidence bundle
(tar.gz + manifest)"] + S --> BUNDLE + T3 --> BUNDLE + + BUNDLE --> MIRROR["Static mirror
(public download)"] + BUNDLE --> REG["Registry anchor
(PQ-hybrid, when enabled)"] +``` + +Interpretation: integrity begins at the backend witness boundary; completeness is meaningful at and after that boundary until edge witnessing exists. + +--- + +## 7) Threat Model (Why Standard Logs Fail) + +The trace protocol is built for an explicit adversary: **the dispute**. + +Primary failure modes it is designed to prevent: + +- “The logs say one thing, the user screenshot says another.” (repudiation) +- “A retrieval set was poisoned, then the retrieval event was deleted.” (selective deletion) +- “A decision was claimed to be reviewed, but there is no lineage.” (audit theater) + +Failure mode analysis (separate artifact): + +- `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/IF_TTT_FAILURE_MODE_ANALYSIS_v1.md` + +--- + +## 8) Validation Status (Honest) + +- **External human testing:** anecdotal pre-testing only; not clinical validation. +- **Scale:** unproven beyond microlab; numbers are not presented as global claims. +- **Key management / attestations:** not audit-grade yet (explicit roadmap below). + +--- + +## 9) Boundaries & Roadmap (What Must Be Built Next) + +This is the “reviewer red‑flags” list, answered directly. + +### 9.1 Key management (blocker for certification) + +Current: file-based Ed25519 keys sufficient for microlab evidence binding. +Required: key generation ceremony + rotation + compromise response; HSM/TPM-backed signing for high-stakes deployments. + +### 9.2 Completeness boundary (edge witnessing) + +Current: bounded completeness begins at backend witness boundary. +Required: edge-level request witnessing (or independent transparency log) to reduce “selective trace” risk. + +### 9.3 Code identity / execution integrity + +Current: bundle binds outputs and retrieval lineage. +Required: signed deploy attestations; reproducible build digest binding; optional remote attestation in higher-assurance environments. + +### 9.4 Clock integrity + +Current: timestamps are informative, not cryptographically trusted. +Required: monotonic counters + periodic anchoring; external timestamping strategy for forensic-grade timelines. + +--- + +## 10) Where to Go Deeper + +- Full dossier (uncut): `DANNY_STOCKER_INFRAFABRIC_DOSSIER.md` +- IF.emotion trace protocol (detailed): `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/IF_EMOTION_DEBUGGING_TRACE_WHITEPAPER_v3.3_STYLED.md` +- Evidence bundles directory: `https://infrafabric.io/static/hosted/`