One table re-extracted from a pinned upstream commit, the way every value here
has moved until now. Two lexicon rows authored here at the source owner's
direction, which has never happened before and needed a reason that is not "we
measured it and we were right."
Consumers: byte-identity against v0.3.0 goes red by construction - pattern text
changed. Ids, labels, aliases, family membership, case ids and every count are
unchanged.
README version sync: vendoring examples move to v0.4.0 (both subtree and
fork-and-own), the secret-egress table count 18 -> 19, and the divergence-doc row
stops claiming no data file was changed because of it. Two were - and the row now
says why that did not come from the document.
Verified: JSON well-formed, every JSON has top-level version, every spec still
normative, charter clean.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JLEZ4XCSnSrQUFA8SzkQB4
The guard answered the span-byte question with evidence rather than preference:
their [^><] is a measured ReDoS fix (cff0437, 2026-07-31), and they asked us to
measure our form rather than take their word for it. We did.
Node v25.8.2 and Python 3.14.0, patterns read out of the lexicon, run over
'<script ' repeated — the unit that denies the pattern the > it needs:
25.5ms at 16k chars, 6681.6ms at 256k. x4.0 per doubling against the guard
form's x2. Quadratic against linear, reproduced in both engines. It is
scan-position quadratic, not catastrophic backtracking: <script matches at ~n
positions and [^>]* scans to end of input at each one.
Counted across the whole file instead of stopping at the row we were told
about: 8 of 83 patterns carry a bare [^>], none carries [^><]. Six are the
bounded html-obfuscation family — measured linear, so bounding does work, at
the recall cost this file already records. Two are unbounded, and the second
one, hybrid-xss:iframe-src, had not been named by any party: 16.9s at 256k
chars. That row is ours, found by counting rather than by being told.
No data file touched. Both patterns stay byte-identical to llm-security's
source, because behaviour preservation is not suspended when a measurement is
unwelcome — commons carries [^>] on provenance and would carry [^><] had the
source been the guard's. The finding is routed to the owning runtime instead,
which is exactly the path SECURITY.md promised an outsider three commits ago.
First time that route is walked from the inside.
Also recorded: the guard's own disclosure that their suite passes under both
forms (717 green), because their DoS row repeats '<script>' — which supplies
the > and never exercises the run.
Verified: JSON well-formed, every spec still normative, charter clean.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T85QqeiWBEoBMjWaMiBnxD
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
Their coord message of 2026-08-11T11:01:59Z measured the three <script> forms as
totally ordered by what they match — [^>] strictly contains [^><] strictly contains
the pre-0.7.0 closing-tag form — and named two input classes the guard's narrower
class drops that commons had not recorded: `<script a="<" >x` and `<script<div>`.
Reproduced independently before writing it down, including the strict-superset
property in both directions. Their table came with a claim attached; the claim is
now a measurement here rather than a relayed assertion.
Their argument for [^>] — the narrower class buys an empty false-positive surface,
since anything reaching [^>]-and-not-[^><] already contains a literal <script tag —
is recorded as THEIRS and marked explicitly as not what decided commons' form.
Commons carries [^>] on provenance and would have carried [^><] had the source been
the guard's. Keeping that distinction visible matters more than the regex: if merit
ever becomes the reason a commons pattern moves, behaviour-preservation is gone.
Also records honestly that they asked to hear the guard's reason for [^><] before
commons shipped, and commons shipped first — with why that order is defensible
rather than an oversight. A reason that beats their argument is a reason for the
guard's own port; commons would still track its declared source.
Informative file only. v0.3.0 unaffected.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HuudQLGMyMenuyeZk8fKs5
v0.2.0 changed what a runtime must DECLARE. This one changes what a conforming
runtime FINDS. A consumer that vendors 0.3.0 and re-runs its suite will see a
finding on inputs that produced none under 0.2.0. In 0.x that is a minor bump by
the rules; the CHANGELOG says so at the top rather than leaving it to be found in
a diff.
The lexicon 0.6.0 entry that sat under [Unreleased] is folded into this release —
committed but never tagged, and 0.7.0 supersedes its central claim (that commons
does not follow the upstream change).
Version sync: README's subtree-add and clone examples move v0.2.0 -> v0.3.0, the
two "as of v0.2.0" markers move with them, the corpus row goes 89 -> 90 cases and
83 -> 84 lexicon cases, and the scope breakdown now says 84 cases over 83 patterns
rather than implying one case per pattern. schema/conformance-declaration.schema.json
gains its own row; the corpus-spec row now mentions the declared table set, since
§1.1 is the reason a reader would go looking.
Verification run before tagging: all JSON well-formed; every non-conformance JSON
carries a top-level version; every spec carries Status: normative; charter guard
clean (no executable code); manifest count == cases[] length == directories on disk
== 90, no duplicate ids; every case's recorded bytes and sha256 recomputed from
disk, zero mismatches, no trailing newlines; measured count_by_scope equals the
manifest's; declaration schema valid draft 2020-12 with its example validating.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HuudQLGMyMenuyeZk8fKs5
llm-security commit 90f576f (2026-08-10) dropped the closing-</script>-tag
requirement from hybrid-xss:script-tag, matching what the guard has always had.
Both now agree in shape (no closing tag required), still not byte-identical
([^><] vs [^>]). Commons' own extracted pattern is unchanged under
behaviour-preservation, so it is the only one of the three still requiring a
closing tag — the opposite of what the divergence doc said when it was written.
injection-lexicon.json gains source_fidelity.post_extraction_drift: the
existing 83/83-at-b0de0ca claim is untouched (extraction-commit fidelity never
decays), and the new 82/83-at-b1ba1fb count carries its own commit and date so
it doesn't read as a bare, decaying "vs HEAD" claim.
Verified directly against both upstream trees this session, not relayed:
llm-security's public remote re-fetched to b1ba1fb, guard read at HEAD 0dce50f.
A runtime that conformed to v0.1.0 does not conform to this one until it declares the
set of commons data files it implements (spec section 1.1). In 0.x that is a minor
bump by the rules, but it is breaking in substance, and the CHANGELOG entry says so
rather than leaving a consumer to discover it in a failing suite.
Both consumers were notified by coord before this tag existed, which is the wrong
order in one respect: they were told to expect a contract change they could not yet
vendor. README says to vendor a tag and never main, so the notice was unactionable
until now. Tagging closes that gap rather than opening a new one.
Version sync: README's subtree-add and clone examples pinned v0.1.0 and now pin
v0.2.0; the subtree-pull example is a placeholder rather than a version, since it
demonstrated "move to a newer tag" while naming the current one. The two remaining
v0.1.0 mentions are historical statements about what that release promised and stay
as they are.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01CVouC9nsfrfV5jRSejxbvQ
The corpus goes 83 -> 89 and scope_covered gains signatures/active-content.json.
The blocker in STATE dissolved under measurement, the same way last session's
13-pattern one did. "An id space for carriers/active-content/secret-egress" was one
question in name only; the three tables have three unrelated problems:
- active-content needed NO id space invented. label_format ("active:{class}") and the
constructs keys were already extracted verbatim from the seed runtime, and their
concatenation IS what it emits - verified by comparing the six keys to the six class
strings at its _flag call sites. What blocked these cases was never naming; it was
spec section 1, fixed in the parent commit.
- carriers has no adoptable id space AND an entry-point dependence underneath it.
- secret-egress is not an id question at all: the two runtimes carry DIFFERENT tables.
18 entries here against the guard's 25, cut at different granularities - this file's
single `GitHub Token` is four ids there, `Private Key PEM Block` three, `Database
connection string` four - with membership diverging both ways. `aws-access-key-id`
is the one clean 1:1, which is why exactly one egress case was ever offered. That
number was a symptom, not modesty.
Both blockers are now recorded under scope_planned.blockers, measured, replacing a
blanket "no runtime has agreed to an id space" that was wrong for both.
Generated from measurement, not written. Payloads were extracted from the seed
runtime's coverage.py by AST - evaluating each _scan_case argument in that module's
own namespace rather than retyping detection data - then run through its public
output gate, the same entry point the 83 lexicon cases used. The fixtures were then
re-read from disk by a separate checker that re-computed every digest, re-scanned the
bytes and applied exact-within-scope independently of the generator: 6 cases, 0
failed checks.
Six built from seven offered. The runtime's matrix drives two payloads at
`active:markdown-image`; measured, their in-scope finding sets are identical, and the
second's only distinguishing signal (entropy:base64-blob) falls outside every table
this repository publishes. Dropped rather than given a discriminated case id, and
named under omitted_payloads so the count reads as a decision.
These six prove LESS than the 83, and the manifest says so: their payloads come from
the only runtime implementing the table, so no second implementation's agreement
could be measured. They pin one runtime's behaviour as a contract a future
implementer can be held to - less than cross-runtime agreement, more than nothing.
llm-security's absence of the table is measured at b0de0ca, not assumed: a tree-wide
search finds no implementation, and `git log -S` over --all returns zero commits,
closing the "it was there once" reading. Absent table is not absent capability -
their entropy scanner reaches markdown-image URLs by another route - and the manifest
says that too.
Provenance and measurement for the active-content half are kept in their own blocks:
a different source structure at a different commit, and one pin must not stand for
two measurements. The guard's HEAD moved twice during the work (3c56d50 -> de09711 ->
398eb74); measurement ran at de09711 and the drift is recorded, including that
active_content.py is NOT identical to the 0bf0729 the data file pins - the change
adds a scan-cap self-safety finding and touches no construct.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01CVouC9nsfrfV5jRSejxbvQ
The guard asked twice which file:line carried it. Tracing it produced an
uncomfortable answer: no file of ours measured it. The claim arrived from
llm-security (coord 20260809T201048Z) and was written down here as a commons
finding in three places.
Measured against the guard's own tree: severity.mjs has never appeared in
src/llm_ingestion_guard/injection_lexicon.json at any point in that file's
history (git log -S: no commits), and at 0bf0729 - the commit our manifest
pins - the only tree-wide occurrence is docs/PLAN.md:114, correctly about the
report module. Their only lexicon source statement is the note at line 3, and
it names injection-patterns.mjs. The right file.
No detection data moves. hybrid severity is still high, still sourced to
injection-patterns.mjs:274-281 at b0de0ca; severity.mjs still has zero
occurrences of the four pattern arrays, re-measured today. Only the sentence
about the other repository falls.
Marked in place, not edited away. The claim survived review because it came
bundled with a correct measurement of the same question - a wrong citation to
a right value, which is exactly what the field it lived in was written to warn
against.
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json 0.5.0 -> 0.5.1 (provenance metadata only).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01DWKkmKQBsWtrkod4MusUBC
schema/finding.schema.json defines a finding `id` as DS-<scanner>-<counter>,
built from a process-global counter: stable across neither runs nor
processes, and the schema says so itself. The corpus keys its comparison on
the lexicon's stable rule identity. Two normative documents in one
repository using one word for both would produce runtimes failing every case
for a reason unrelated to detection.
Also adds spec section 3.1, which publishes the bridge a consumer actually
needs and which neither normative document named: a runtime's own label
reaches a pattern_id through the lexicon's `aliases` object, and a runtime
absent from that object has no published way to be compared -- a mapping
kept privately in a consumer is the drift this repository exists to prevent.
Regenerated all 83 fixtures; re-verified from the corpus alone against both
runtimes, 83 cases, 0 failures.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WhXDL82FRrQWedEmUg12Pj
The corpus was blocked on a decision nobody had to take. The 13 divergent
lexicon patterns were measured on witness inputs -- an attribute run padded
past 256 characters, an interior '<', an unclosed <script> -- and the corpus
payloads contain none of those shapes. Run through both runtimes' public
entry points, all 83 patterns produce identical lexicon finding sets, the 13
included. No winner picked, because the question was never reachable from
these inputs.
Measured at each runtime's entry point (scanForInjection() at b0de0ca,
scan_output(source=OUTPUT) at 0bf0729), never at a rebuilt regex table --
the layer mistake the divergence document already had to retract once.
- conformance/<case>/{input.txt,expected.json} x83, plus manifest.json
- spec/conformance-corpus.md, normative: bytes not text, id-only findings,
exact-within-scope, and observed_out_of_scope as evidence not expectation
Verified by a harness that does not share the generator's knowledge: reads
only the case directories, re-runs both runtimes, checks every field
including digests -- 83 cases, 0 failures. Severity agrees with what commons
publishes 83/83. Deleting the middle third of each input breaks 76 of 83
expectations; the 7 survivors are the shortest payloads, a weak mutation
rather than a weak fixture, and are recorded as such.
Scope is 83 and not 94 for a different reason than expected: the 11
non-lexicon convertible cases have no ratified cross-runtime finding id, and
writing them would mint a contract unilaterally in the same stroke as the
tag. Named in manifest.json under scope_planned.
Docs corrected in place rather than edited away: extraction-plan and
lexicon-port-divergence both claimed the 13 blocked the corpus.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WhXDL82FRrQWedEmUg12Pj
Four corrections across the two informative documents, all of them to
claims this repository made and none of them to a data file.
The retraction is the important one. lexicon-port-divergence.md said
neither runtime misses an attack: every witness payload still produced a
finding, so the divergence was only in which labels were raised. That was
wrong in method rather than in arithmetic. The payloads had been run
against the UNION of every pattern table this repository holds - 111 rules
across the lexicon, active-content.json and secret-egress.json - and the
hit that rescued them came from active-content.json, which is the Python
guard's table. llm-security has no active-content table at all. Unioning
two runtimes' tables and reading the result as a statement about each of
them turns combined reach into individual coverage.
Re-measured through llm-security's own entry point scanForInjection() at
b0de0ca - the whole engine, normalisation, homoglyph folding, rot13 and all
four arrays - all three witness payloads return found: false. Not a
different label set: no finding at all. Controls in the same run behave
normally, so the {0,256} window is a real evasion window and the <script>
pattern really does require a closing tag. llm-security reached the same
three results independently and has logged them as a v8.x task.
Second: one of the 13 divergences does not reach report level. On the
iframe witness the guard misses hybrid-xss:iframe-src but its
hybrid-xss:javascript-uri fires at the same severity and the same OWASP
anchor, so a reader of its report still sees the payload flagged. Both
sides were re-measured to confirm. The report-level number is 12; the 13
stands as the number that blocks conformance/, because a fixture names
labels.
Third: extraction-plan.md said six of the confusables have no entry in the
fold map. It is zero - all 13 are keys in the 28-entry map, and
carriers.json has said so correctly since it was written. The prose, not
the data, carried the error, and the number six most likely came from
running the comparison the other way (five fold-map Cyrillic keys are not
confusables). It also called the diverging sets deliberately distinct;
llm-security states the U+0456 / U+0445 divergence is drift, not design,
and has logged it for v8.x. Those two readings imply opposite things about
whether the sets should be expected to converge.
Fourth: the seed-sources section still asserted that sessions here have no
read access to llm-security and that content arrives only as a dump. The
operator changed that on 2026-08-09. It now records the read-only pinned-
commit boundary, the still-absolute prohibition on the sibling working copy
and on writing, and the reason the change matters - four attribution
defects caught so far, every one a transcription artefact.
Status blocks updated: all eight JSON artefacts now exist, seven verified
differentially and calibration.json still honestly verified: false; the
conformance blocker is half-cleared, with naming ratified and the 13
divergent patterns still unresolved.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01SNMcqrfNyoLRQ7qXUFZnb9
The last missing data file. Seven known-bad-identity signatures over four
families - webshell, reverse_shell, cryptominer, hacktool - reproduced
verbatim from llm-security/knowledge/signatures.json at b0de0ca, key order
included. The file was generated from the parsed source rather than typed,
and provenance pins the source's byte length (2494) and SHA-256 so the
claim is checkable rather than asserted.
Note the family spellings: reverse_shell with an underscore, and
cryptominer rather than miner. The working note this file was planned from
had both wrong. They are policy keys - the engine filters on them and
interpolates them into every finding title - so a rename is a breaking
change, which is exactly why the table was read instead of recalled.
The rules were the easy half. The substance is engine_behaviour_not_data,
which draws the line between the table and the runtime around it. No rule
carries a flags field, because the engine compiles every pattern with `i`
unconditionally at signature-scanner.mjs:48 - so a consumer compiling these
case-sensitively silently under-matches all seven, and the dialect block
records that where a reader will hit it. Also engine, not data: matching
against five decode variants rather than raw bytes, the enabled-families
policy filter, per-file rule dedup, custom-rule merging, and a loader that
defaults four missing fields instead of rejecting a rule.
Two limits are stated as evidence limits rather than left implied. Seven
signatures are not malware coverage; a clean SIG result is not "no
malware", and the seed runtime's own header calls the table deliberately
tight. And three of the seven match on names - xmrig, mimikatz,
meterpreter - so a document discussing those tools matches. The seed
runtime hides that by excluding knowledge/, tests/, docs/ and
node_modules/, which is scan scoping and does not travel with the table.
Verified: 7/7 rule objects field-identical to source including key order,
no non-ASCII bytes, all seven compile in Node bare, i and iu (21/21) and in
Python re (7/7). Charter guard clean - no executable code in the repository.
README and CHANGELOG updated: the file moves out of "planned, not in
v0.1.0" and out of "not included".
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01SNMcqrfNyoLRQ7qXUFZnb9
The schema was seeded from sarif-formatter.mjs, which consumes findings.
That could only ever establish a lower bound on the property set, so
additionalProperties had to stay open. The producer is now readable:
finding() in scanners/lib/output.mjs line 32, at b0de0ca. It returns an
object literal with exactly ten keys and no spread, so the set is complete
and the schema closes.
Added: id and evidence, the two keys a consumer-side reading could not see.
id gets its own definition, DS-<prefix>-<counter>, with pattern
^DS-[A-Za-z]+-[0-9]{3,} - the {3,} because padStart(3) is a minimum, so a
run past 999 findings produces four digits. It comes from a process-global
counter and is stable neither across runs nor across processes; the
definition says so before someone keys on it.
Nullability is evidence now, not convention. Five keys are emitted as null
rather than omitted, so a serialised finding always carries all ten. The
four assigned straight from opts are the exception: omit description and
the key is undefined and disappears from the JSON. Reproduced against the
real producer - ten keys in memory, nine serialised.
owasp is a string, not an array, and not one code. Multiple codes are
joined with ", ". Measured across the seed runtime: 31 distinct values over
157 sites, 13 multi-code, and four that mix taxonomies inside a single
value with no discriminator. That has a consequence nobody had written
down: sarif-formatter builds tags: [f.owasp], so "LLM06, ASI02" becomes ONE
tag with a comma in it and nothing filtering on LLM06 matches. Reproduced
end to end through the real finding() and toSARIF(), logged as
known_lossiness.owasp-tag-not-split. It is consumer behaviour, not data, so
it is reported rather than fixed here.
The JSONL profile is set to "not applicable" rather than "unspecified".
The distinction carries weight: unspecified would assert a profile exists
and has merely not been written down. There is no finding-JSONL - findings
are emitted only inside one JSON envelope. The single module that does
write JSONL, audit-trail.mjs, writes audit events under a different schema
where owasp is an ARRAY. Same field name, different type, same repository.
The profile records that trap instead of leaving a TODO.
Verified: valid Draft 2020-12, every finding built by the real producer
validates, and four negative controls are rejected.
One new open question left unpatched: the producer's JSDoc lists seventeen
scanner prefixes including IDE, while all four maps in owasp-map.json are
keyed on sixteen without it. An IDE finding has no taxonomy mapping
anywhere. Adding the key would be inventing detection data.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01SNMcqrfNyoLRQ7qXUFZnb9
Two things the file was waiting on arrived, and both are now data rather
than open questions.
families[hybrid].severity was null by design - the seed dump supplied the
array but not the severity. It is "high". The value is not stored anywhere
as a field: the engine assigns it by pushing HYBRID_PATTERNS matches
straight into the high bucket at injection-patterns.mjs:274-281, under the
comment "Hybrid patterns are HIGH severity (v5.0 S6)".
severity_provenance names the file it is NOT in. Both this repository and
the Python guard first looked in severity.mjs, which contains no injection-
family severity at all - grep it for any of the four pattern constants and
you get nothing. The guard's port carries the right value while citing that
file, so a consumer following its citation finds no answer. A wrong citation
to a right value survives review in a way a wrong value does not, so it is
recorded rather than quietly fixed.
pattern_id_space.not_yet_confirmed is replaced by a ratification block.
Both seeding runtimes agreed on 2026-08-09: llm-security ratified the 0.2.0
proposal as-is and treats an id change as breaking on the same terms, and
the guard confirmed the space its own port supplied. The id is a
cross-runtime contract now, which is what conformance/ needed before a
fixture could name a finding at all.
alias_evidence.llm_security is sharpened, not upgraded. All 83 alias
strings were confirmed equal to the module's label field in array order, so
the alias is certainly the pattern's name in the table. It is still not
established that a FINDING carries it: output.mjs:finding() emits title and
has no label key. Verified at table level, one level short of where it
would matter.
No detection data moved: all 83 patterns still byte-identical to the module
at b0de0ca, and no pattern entry differs from HEAD.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01SNMcqrfNyoLRQ7qXUFZnb9
The lexicon was seeded from a transcribed dump. With the source module now
readable read-only at b0de0ca on the public remote, it was imported in Node
and compared entry by entry - RegExp source, flags, label, family, array
order. That check contradicted the file twice, in mirror-image ways.
The file claimed it had rewritten raw code points into \uXXXX escapes in
homoglyph:cyrillic-latin-mix and unicode:zero-width-in-word, and carried
byte_identical_to_source: false for both. The module already writes them
escaped. Nothing was ever rewritten. The stored pattern text was correct
throughout - only the account of its origin was wrong, because the dump had
rendered the module's escapes as the characters they denote and this
repository escaped them back.
The same inversion ran the other way in multi-lang:french, which stored a raw
accented Latin e where the module writes the é escape. That was the one
pattern of 83 not byte-identical to source, and it is corrected here, making
it 83/83. Both spellings are the same regular expression: compiled in Node
bare and under u, and in Python re, over accented, unaccented, uppercase and
non-matching French input, with identical match offsets. No behaviour moved.
Exactly one pattern entry differs from HEAD, and no pattern in the file
contains a non-ASCII byte any more - which matches the module, whose regex
literals are ASCII throughout. A third claim fell with them: the translation
note asserting that the leetspeak and multi-language patterns embed accented
Latin directly was wrong in both halves.
normalisations is now [] with a normalisations_note, the convention already
in signatures/secret-egress.json. A new source_fidelity block carries the
counts, the method, the verified class membership, and both retractions in
full - retracted, not deleted. The equivalence evidence behind the withdrawn
claim (692 Node comparisons, 236 Python) is still a true statement about raw
versus escaped; it is just no longer load-bearing.
Provenance upgraded accordingly: source_commit pinned, and the caveat saying
these checks only proved agreement with a dump is gone, because they no
longer do.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01SNMcqrfNyoLRQ7qXUFZnb9
Advisor review found six gaps the session's own checks did not cover. The one
that mattered was outward-facing: the divergence report told the guard repo
that two sub-agent bounds were undocumented. That was wrong. lexicon.py's
module docstring documents them explicitly under "Bounded token gaps", and
git log -S dates {0,12} to the original port commit f397cd9 and [^><] to the
ReDoS fix cff0437. Every divergence on the guard's side is documented and
traceable. The claim rested on two sed slices of one file; an absence claim
needs a search over the whole repository. Corrected here and by coord.
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json 0.2.0 -> 0.3.0:
- pattern_id_space.alias_evidence records the two aliases separately instead
of averaging them. llm_ingestion_guard is verified — coverage.py asserts on
that exact string, so it is demonstrably what a guard finding carries.
llm_security is not: it is the pattern table's name, the finding producer
was never supplied, and the known Node finding shape uses title, not label.
- normalisations[].affects now keys on id, with the prose names kept beside it
as affects_labels. An internal cross-reference on label was a second
identity space inside the file the id exists to unify.
Detection data unmoved again: labels, patterns, flags and the ids and aliases
added in 7b70f5b are all byte-identical in sequence; 166/166 Node compiles.
Also: the README lexicon row described thematic families the file does not
have (they are severity families; the theme is the id prefix), and the
conformance convertibility table gained its missing second condition — a case
is buildable only if the label it asserts maps to data this repository
publishes. Eleven cases fail that test (entropy, decoded, the sanitize rows,
the OKF scans), so the buildable set is ~94, not 105.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FaYqid3mejFmd9ZHsiHgp3
A conformance fixture has to name a finding. The two runtimes that seed this
repository do not name the same pattern the same way -- llm-security says
"override: ignore previous instructions", the guard says
"override:ignore-previous" -- so until now no expected.json could be written
at all, including for the 64 patterns whose regex is byte-identical in both.
Each pattern now carries `id` plus an `aliases` object naming what each
seeding runtime calls it, and a top-level pattern_id_space block explains the
field, its provenance and its stability contract.
The id is adopted verbatim from the guard's port rather than invented here:
that port already carries both names, so the mapping is read from source data.
Matched by label <-> desc with em-dash normalised to hyphen, 83/83 one-to-one,
83 unique ids.
No detection data moved, and that is proven rather than asserted: labels,
patterns and flags are byte-identical in sequence, no flags key was invented
(78 before, 78 after), and stripping id + aliases + pattern_id_space
reproduces the previous committed file byte for byte -- 23566 bytes. All 83
patterns still compile in Node bare and under u (166/166) and in Python re
(83/83).
Neither consumer has ratified this id space; both were asked by coord today,
and the file records it as a proposal rather than implying agreement.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FaYqid3mejFmd9ZHsiHgp3
The guard's coverage.py turned out to be readable from a session here — the
read boundary covers llm-security only. Counting it instead of estimating
corrected two published numbers and surfaced the real conformance blocker.
Counted, not estimated: CORE_CASES holds 134 cases (128 caught, 6 gap), not
the "126 classes + 4 gaps-must-hold" the extraction plan claimed. 105 are
convertible to static input/expected; 29 assert a runtime API surface this
repository does not own, and are named as out of scope rather than faked.
Measured while counting, and the reason the corpus is still blocked: the
commons lexicon and the guard's are two ports of one source file, and they
disagree. 83/83 patterns correspond, 64 byte-identical, 6 differ only by
escaping and are proven equivalent by string identity, and 13 behave
differently — with a witness input for each and misses in both directions.
Cause is two different ReDoS mitigations of the same table: the Node side
bounds the run ({0,256}), the guard excludes the anchor character ([^><]).
Each has a recall cost the other does not.
No data file changed. Behaviour preservation is a v0.1.0 invariant, so the
divergence is reported to the owning repositories, not fixed here. The 8
hybrid severities the guard's port assigns are deliberately NOT copied in —
a second-hand port is not the producing module.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FaYqid3mejFmd9ZHsiHgp3
repo-standard's gate flagged 10 dead internal README links. Seven now
resolve because the files landed this session. The remaining three are
unlinked and marked "Planned, not in v0.1.0" rather than invented:
- signatures/malware-signatures.json — seed data not delivered
- spec/decode-pipeline.md — needs the decode implementation, which is engine
code and was not supplied. A normative spec guessed from a data dump would
be worse than an absent one: it would carry a Status: normative marker and
pass every convention check while saying nothing anyone verified.
- conformance/ — corpus form is still an open decision
The changelog claimed 0.1.0 shipped "a conformance corpus". It does not.
Rewritten to enumerate what is actually present, to state which files were
proven differentially and which one (calibration) carries verified: false,
and to name what is not included. Moved back under [Unreleased] because the
tag has not been cut.
README also now tells a reader that each data file records its own provenance
and verification strength, and which file currently says false.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FaYqid3mejFmd9ZHsiHgp3
Data+contract+fixtures repository for runtime-neutral LLM/agent security
detection. Charter is hard: no engine code, no dependencies, no runtime —
JSON data, normative specs and conformance fixtures only.
Scaffolding only; the seed data files land in follow-up commits from
verified source dumps (never from recollection).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0191AKc2qW6tmXDFSx1xn53q
