Enrich Dave dossier + add provenance hashes
This commit is contained in:
parent
0a65d911f9
commit
6da892f8c7
2 changed files with 24 additions and 0 deletions
|
|
@ -4,12 +4,15 @@
|
||||||
**Citation:** `if://bible/dave/v1.0` 🧾
|
**Citation:** `if://bible/dave/v1.0` 🧾
|
||||||
**Source:** `examples/ai-code-guardrails/AI-Code-Guardrails.pdf` 📎
|
**Source:** `examples/ai-code-guardrails/AI-Code-Guardrails.pdf` 📎
|
||||||
**Generated:** `2025-12-25` 🗓️
|
**Generated:** `2025-12-25` 🗓️
|
||||||
|
**Source Hash (sha256):** `6153a5998fe103e69f6d5b6042fbe780476ff869a625fcf497fd1948b2944b7c` 🔐
|
||||||
**Extract Hash (sha256):** `2e73e0eca81cf91c81382c009861eea0f2fc7e3f972b5ef8aca83970dabe5972` 🔍
|
**Extract Hash (sha256):** `2e73e0eca81cf91c81382c009861eea0f2fc7e3f972b5ef8aca83970dabe5972` 🔍
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Warm-Up: Quick vibes check-in 👋
|
## Warm-Up: Quick vibes check-in 👋
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Happy 2025-12-25, Team! 🌤️ We love the momentum here, and it’s genuinely exciting to see **Security** and **Velocity** showing up to the same meeting for once. 🤝
|
Happy 2025-12-25, Team! 🌤️ We love the momentum here, and it’s genuinely exciting to see **Security** and **Velocity** showing up to the same meeting for once. 🤝
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Also, the headline takeaway is *very* on-brand for modern delivery: the source cites ~**27%** of AI-generated code containing vulnerabilities, which is more about volume + velocity than “tool failure.” 📊
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Alignment: Shared outcomes (high-level) 🎯
|
## Alignment: Shared outcomes (high-level) 🎯
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We are all super aligned on the vision of shipping faster *and* safer, while minimizing any unexpected “operational headwinds.” 📈
|
We are all super aligned on the vision of shipping faster *and* safer, while minimizing any unexpected “operational headwinds.” 📈
|
||||||
|
|
@ -18,6 +21,8 @@ We are all super aligned on the vision of shipping faster *and* safer, while min
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We are going to keep leveraging the existing pull-request review ritual as the canonical “moment of truth,” because changing that now would be… a lot. 🧱
|
We are going to keep leveraging the existing pull-request review ritual as the canonical “moment of truth,” because changing that now would be… a lot. 🧱
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This also keeps us aligned with the recommended pattern: PR checks as the default safety net, plus an optional CI/CD checkpoint for mature pipelines. ✅
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Vibe Check: What the team is feeling 🧠
|
## Vibe Check: What the team is feeling 🧠
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The team feels really good about a layered approach where guardrails show up early (IDE) and also show up late (PR/CI), so nobody has to feel surprised by reality. ✨
|
The team feels really good about a layered approach where guardrails show up early (IDE) and also show up late (PR/CI), so nobody has to feel surprised by reality. ✨
|
||||||
|
|
@ -46,6 +51,7 @@ Suggested phased guardrails (light-touch, high-leverage) ✅
|
||||||
- **IDE scanning** for real-time feedback (plugin-based) 🔍
|
- **IDE scanning** for real-time feedback (plugin-based) 🔍
|
||||||
- **CI/CD checkpoint** as a second layer for mature pipelines 🧱
|
- **CI/CD checkpoint** as a second layer for mature pipelines 🧱
|
||||||
- **Agent workflows** supported via a local MCP server (background checks while code is generated) 🤖
|
- **Agent workflows** supported via a local MCP server (background checks while code is generated) 🤖
|
||||||
|
- **Developer training** that explicitly covers GenAI risk (e.g., OWASP Top 10 for LLM/GenAI-style material) 🎓
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Compliance Trap: Keeping everyone safe and aligned 🛡️
|
## Compliance Trap: Keeping everyone safe and aligned 🛡️
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -55,6 +61,7 @@ Implementation options we can socialize 📣
|
||||||
- Require a lightweight **Access Request** with proof of local testing (e.g., a screenshot showing the security IDE plugin is installed) 🖼️
|
- Require a lightweight **Access Request** with proof of local testing (e.g., a screenshot showing the security IDE plugin is installed) 🖼️
|
||||||
- Run periodic audits using IDE/CLI usage reporting to identify blind spots (trust-but-verify energy) 🧭
|
- Run periodic audits using IDE/CLI usage reporting to identify blind spots (trust-but-verify energy) 🧭
|
||||||
- Use endpoint management (Intune/Jamf/Citrix) to gate access until prerequisites are met (conditional access rules) 🔐
|
- Use endpoint management (Intune/Jamf/Citrix) to gate access until prerequisites are met (conditional access rules) 🔐
|
||||||
|
- Add a “central visibility” layer so Platform/Security can track adoption gaps (missed scans, inactive tooling) as a healthy **KPI Trend** over time. 📈
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Pivot: Start with a slide deck (low-risk, high-visibility) 🖼️
|
## Pivot: Start with a slide deck (low-risk, high-visibility) 🖼️
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -2,12 +2,21 @@ from __future__ import annotations
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
import datetime as _dt
|
import datetime as _dt
|
||||||
import hashlib
|
import hashlib
|
||||||
|
from pathlib import Path
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
def _sha256_text(text: str) -> str:
|
def _sha256_text(text: str) -> str:
|
||||||
return hashlib.sha256(text.encode("utf-8", errors="replace")).hexdigest()
|
return hashlib.sha256(text.encode("utf-8", errors="replace")).hexdigest()
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
def _sha256_file(path: str) -> str:
|
||||||
|
h = hashlib.sha256()
|
||||||
|
with open(path, "rb") as f:
|
||||||
|
for chunk in iter(lambda: f.read(1024 * 1024), b""):
|
||||||
|
h.update(chunk)
|
||||||
|
return h.hexdigest()
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
def generate_shadow_dossier(*, style_id: str, source_text: str, source_path: str) -> str:
|
def generate_shadow_dossier(*, style_id: str, source_text: str, source_path: str) -> str:
|
||||||
if style_id.lower() in {"if.dave.v1", "dave", "if://bible/dave/v1.0"}:
|
if style_id.lower() in {"if.dave.v1", "dave", "if://bible/dave/v1.0"}:
|
||||||
return _generate_dave_v1(source_text=source_text, source_path=source_path)
|
return _generate_dave_v1(source_text=source_text, source_path=source_path)
|
||||||
|
|
@ -17,6 +26,7 @@ def generate_shadow_dossier(*, style_id: str, source_text: str, source_path: str
|
||||||
def _generate_dave_v1(*, source_text: str, source_path: str) -> str:
|
def _generate_dave_v1(*, source_text: str, source_path: str) -> str:
|
||||||
today = _dt.date.today().isoformat()
|
today = _dt.date.today().isoformat()
|
||||||
source_sha = _sha256_text(source_text)
|
source_sha = _sha256_text(source_text)
|
||||||
|
source_file_sha = _sha256_file(source_path) if Path(source_path).exists() else "unknown"
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
return f"""# Shadow Dossier: AI Code Guardrails (Dave Layer Applied) 🚀
|
return f"""# Shadow Dossier: AI Code Guardrails (Dave Layer Applied) 🚀
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -24,12 +34,15 @@ def _generate_dave_v1(*, source_text: str, source_path: str) -> str:
|
||||||
**Citation:** `if://bible/dave/v1.0` 🧾
|
**Citation:** `if://bible/dave/v1.0` 🧾
|
||||||
**Source:** `{source_path}` 📎
|
**Source:** `{source_path}` 📎
|
||||||
**Generated:** `{today}` 🗓️
|
**Generated:** `{today}` 🗓️
|
||||||
|
**Source Hash (sha256):** `{source_file_sha}` 🔐
|
||||||
**Extract Hash (sha256):** `{source_sha}` 🔍
|
**Extract Hash (sha256):** `{source_sha}` 🔍
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Warm-Up: Quick vibes check-in 👋
|
## Warm-Up: Quick vibes check-in 👋
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Happy {today}, Team! 🌤️ We love the momentum here, and it’s genuinely exciting to see **Security** and **Velocity** showing up to the same meeting for once. 🤝
|
Happy {today}, Team! 🌤️ We love the momentum here, and it’s genuinely exciting to see **Security** and **Velocity** showing up to the same meeting for once. 🤝
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Also, the headline takeaway is *very* on-brand for modern delivery: the source cites ~**27%** of AI-generated code containing vulnerabilities, which is more about volume + velocity than “tool failure.” 📊
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Alignment: Shared outcomes (high-level) 🎯
|
## Alignment: Shared outcomes (high-level) 🎯
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We are all super aligned on the vision of shipping faster *and* safer, while minimizing any unexpected “operational headwinds.” 📈
|
We are all super aligned on the vision of shipping faster *and* safer, while minimizing any unexpected “operational headwinds.” 📈
|
||||||
|
|
@ -38,6 +51,8 @@ We are all super aligned on the vision of shipping faster *and* safer, while min
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
We are going to keep leveraging the existing pull-request review ritual as the canonical “moment of truth,” because changing that now would be… a lot. 🧱
|
We are going to keep leveraging the existing pull-request review ritual as the canonical “moment of truth,” because changing that now would be… a lot. 🧱
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This also keeps us aligned with the recommended pattern: PR checks as the default safety net, plus an optional CI/CD checkpoint for mature pipelines. ✅
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Vibe Check: What the team is feeling 🧠
|
## Vibe Check: What the team is feeling 🧠
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The team feels really good about a layered approach where guardrails show up early (IDE) and also show up late (PR/CI), so nobody has to feel surprised by reality. ✨
|
The team feels really good about a layered approach where guardrails show up early (IDE) and also show up late (PR/CI), so nobody has to feel surprised by reality. ✨
|
||||||
|
|
@ -66,6 +81,7 @@ Suggested phased guardrails (light-touch, high-leverage) ✅
|
||||||
- **IDE scanning** for real-time feedback (plugin-based) 🔍
|
- **IDE scanning** for real-time feedback (plugin-based) 🔍
|
||||||
- **CI/CD checkpoint** as a second layer for mature pipelines 🧱
|
- **CI/CD checkpoint** as a second layer for mature pipelines 🧱
|
||||||
- **Agent workflows** supported via a local MCP server (background checks while code is generated) 🤖
|
- **Agent workflows** supported via a local MCP server (background checks while code is generated) 🤖
|
||||||
|
- **Developer training** that explicitly covers GenAI risk (e.g., OWASP Top 10 for LLM/GenAI-style material) 🎓
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Compliance Trap: Keeping everyone safe and aligned 🛡️
|
## Compliance Trap: Keeping everyone safe and aligned 🛡️
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@ -75,6 +91,7 @@ Implementation options we can socialize 📣
|
||||||
- Require a lightweight **Access Request** with proof of local testing (e.g., a screenshot showing the security IDE plugin is installed) 🖼️
|
- Require a lightweight **Access Request** with proof of local testing (e.g., a screenshot showing the security IDE plugin is installed) 🖼️
|
||||||
- Run periodic audits using IDE/CLI usage reporting to identify blind spots (trust-but-verify energy) 🧭
|
- Run periodic audits using IDE/CLI usage reporting to identify blind spots (trust-but-verify energy) 🧭
|
||||||
- Use endpoint management (Intune/Jamf/Citrix) to gate access until prerequisites are met (conditional access rules) 🔐
|
- Use endpoint management (Intune/Jamf/Citrix) to gate access until prerequisites are met (conditional access rules) 🔐
|
||||||
|
- Add a “central visibility” layer so Platform/Security can track adoption gaps (missed scans, inactive tooling) as a healthy **KPI Trend** over time. 📈
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
## Pivot: Start with a slide deck (low-risk, high-visibility) 🖼️
|
## Pivot: Start with a slide deck (low-risk, high-visibility) 🖼️
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Add table
Reference in a new issue