open/llm-security-commons
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Releases 1 Activity

docs(security): the attack surface here is data, so the report route had to say where a wrong entry gets fixed

Browse source 
org-ops recorded SECURITY.md as missing against the org standard (coord,
2026-08-11) and this repository owed it for a sharper reason than "given what
the repo is about": nothing here runs, so a report is never a crash — it is a
detection entry that looks like it works and is not looking.

SECURITY.md therefore answers what an ordinary policy does not have to: how to
report that a detection-table entry is WRONG, and why a confirmed defect in
extracted data is decided in the runtime it was extracted from before it is
changed here. Correcting it here would make the copy disagree with the
implementation it was taken from — two runtimes, two answers on one input, the
exact failure this repository exists to prevent. Two classes skip that routing:
a real secret in the history, and data authored here rather than extracted.
Fix latency is stated plainly as bounded by the owning runtime's schedule and
the consumer's pull, not by ours.

secret-egress 0.1.0 -> 0.2.0 is a staleness DISCLOSURE, not a data change: all
18 patterns byte-identical, one evidence_limits entry added. llm-security
reports the source table at 19 entries now; recorded as their report and not
reproduced, because the commit carrying it is not on their public remote —
measured at b1ba1fb today. What was measured here: none of the 18 patterns
matches a legacy sk-...T3BlbkFJ... shape. A consumer vendoring this file
under-matches the seed hook by one entry, and now reads that in the file.

manifest 0.3.0 -> 0.3.1 corrects the secret-egress blocker. Through 0.3.0 it
named gcp-service-account-json and openai-api-key-legacy together as ids
"absent here". Measured against the guard at e671edb by running this file's own
18 patterns over a service-account document: a COMPLETE service-account key
file is matched here at order 11, since the PEM entry's prefix group is
optional and the bare PKCS#8 header matches; the same document with private_key
removed matches nothing here while the guard's marker still fires. That is a
cut-point difference, which is what the blocker is about, not a missing entry.
openai-api-key-legacy IS a real hole and is now recorded as one. Folded into
the existing blocker string rather than a sibling key, because blockers is a
map from table path to text.

Verified: all JSON well-formed; every non-fixture JSON has a top-level version;
charter clean (no executable code); patterns[] and count byte-identical to HEAD
for secret-egress; manifest key set unchanged and count still 90; 90 case
directories untouched; every spec still carries its normative marker.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T85QqeiWBEoBMjWaMiBnxD
This commit is contained in:
Kjell Tore Guttormsen 2026-08-11 14:03:24 +02:00
commit 0e765a02eb
5 changed files with 201 additions and 4 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
conformance/manifest.json
View file

@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
{
"version": "0.3.0",
"version": "0.3.1",
"id": "llm-security-commons/conformance",
"description": "Enumeration and measurement header for the conformance corpus. Every case directory holds input.txt (the exact bytes to scan) and expected.json (the findings a conforming runtime must produce). The normative reading of those files is spec/conformance-corpus.md; this file records where the cases came from and what was measured.",
"$comment": "Fixture files carry no individual version field. The corpus is versioned as a whole, here — a case is added, removed or corrected by bumping this version, and a case-id change is a MAJOR bump because consumers name cases.",
@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
"signatures/secret-egress.json": 1,
"blockers": {
"codepoints/carriers.json": "No adoptable id space, and a second problem underneath it. The guard emits TWO stage-coupled labels for the same carrier depending on pipeline position — `sanitize:zero-width` (input) versus `output:zero-width-present` (output), and the same split for bidi and unicode-tag; llm-security emits prose titles (unicode-scanner.mjs:191,236). A commons id would therefore have to be invented stage-neutral, which no other id space here required. And because `exact-within-scope` compares a finding SET, a commons id aliasing both guard labels would make the verdict depend on which entry point the runtime was measured through — an entry-point dependence the lexicon cases do not have, since this manifest pins entry point as a measurement fact rather than as contract.",
"signatures/secret-egress.json": "Not an id-naming question at all. The two runtimes carry DIFFERENT TABLES, not two namings of one: this file holds 18 entries from llm-security, the guard's `_SECRET_PATTERNS` (output.py) holds 25 at different cut points — this file's single `GitHub Token` is four ids there, `Private Key PEM Block` is three, `Database connection string` is four — and membership diverges both ways (the guard has `gcp-service-account-json` and `openai-api-key-legacy`, which are absent here; this file has `Slack/Discord Webhook URL` and `Azure AI Services Key`, which are absent there). `aws-access-key-id` is the one clean one-to-one, which is why exactly one egress case was ever offered. A shared id space presupposes a table reconciliation that has not happened."
"signatures/secret-egress.json": "Not an id-naming question at all. The two runtimes carry DIFFERENT TABLES, not two namings of one: this file holds 18 entries from llm-security, the guard's `_SECRET_PATTERNS` (output.py) holds 25 at different cut points — this file's single `GitHub Token` is four ids there, `Private Key PEM Block` is three, `Database connection string` is four. `aws-access-key-id` is the one clean one-to-one, which is why exactly one egress case was ever offered. A shared id space presupposes a table reconciliation that has not happened. Membership diverges both ways, and `Slack/Discord Webhook URL` (order 13) and `Azure AI Services Key` (order 4) are here and absent from the guard. CORRECTED IN 0.3.1: through 0.3.0 this text ended '(the guard has `gcp-service-account-json` and `openai-api-key-legacy`, which are absent here; ...)'. Two entries were named as one kind of fact, and they are two different kinds. Measured here on 2026-08-11 by running this file's own 18 patterns, in `order`, over a service-account document, against the guard at commit `e671edb`. (1) `gcp-service-account-json` is NOT a coverage hole here. A complete service-account key file matches this table at order 11, `Private Key PEM Block`: that pattern's prefix group `(?:RSA |EC |DSA |OPENSSH )?` is optional, so the bare PKCS#8 header `-----BEGIN PRIVATE KEY-----` such a file carries is matched. What differs is the CUT POINT: the same document with its `private_key` field removed matches nothing here, while the guard's `\"type\"\\s*:\\s*\"service_account\"` still fires — the guard detects the document MARKER, this table detects the KEY MATERIAL. Both fire on a real key file; only the guard fires on a stripped one. That is exactly the cut-point divergence this blocker is about, and it is not a missing entry. (2) `openai-api-key-legacy` IS a real hole here as of this version: no pattern in this file matches a legacy `sk-…T3BlbkFJ…` key, measured the same way. llm-security reports (coord, 2026-08-11) having added `OpenAI Legacy API Key` to `SECRET_PATTERNS`, 18 -> 19 — their claim, not reproduced here, because the commit carrying it is not on their public remote yet. This file is therefore knowingly STALE against its own declared source until it can be re-extracted from a pinned commit, and this note stays until that re-extraction lands."
}
},
"omitted_payloads": [