56 KiB
Changelog
All notable changes to this project will be documented in this file.
The format is based on Keep a Changelog, and this project adheres to Semantic Versioning.
Versioning note: the repository tag versions the contract (file set, key names,
case ids, disposition semantics). Each JSON file additionally carries its own
"version" field, bumped when that file changes.
[0.4.3] — 2026-08-11
No fixture, id or expected.json moved — a runtime that passes 0.4.2 passes 0.4.3
unchanged. What changed is a claim this repository made about a runtime it does not own, and the
claim was wrong on the day it was written.
Fixed
-
conformance/manifest.json0.3.2→0.3.4— thescope_planned.blockersentry forcodepoints/carriers.jsondescribed the guard as emitting two stage-coupled labels per carrier, "the same split for bidi and unicode-tag". The artifact-side label for tags islexicon:unicode-tags-present, emitted fromlexicon.py, andoutput.pycarries a comment saying it deliberately does not repeat it there. Wrong when written, not stale: checked ate671edb— the commit the sibling secret-egress blocker was measured against — wherecoverage.pyalready asserted that label, and re-measured ata59184b.The correction moves the blocker rather than removing it. The guard's
Findingcarries adetectorfield besidelabel, and the prefix is that field's value:detector="lexicon"onlexicon:unicode-tags-present,"output"onoutput:zero-width-present. The prefix names the detector, not the pipeline stage — and for tags a single detector serves both entry points, which is why there is no sixthoutput:label to find. "A commons id would have to be invented stage-neutral" was never the problem. Six labels exist to adopt verbatim, the way the 83 lexicon ids were adopted from this same runtime's port.What blocks adoption is measured and named instead, at llm-security
47905da:sanitize:asserts a strip that runtime does not perform (scanners/unicode-scanner.mjsexports one entry point,scan(targetPath, discovery), reporting presence withscanner: 'UNI', a prose title and no id); three of the six name a persist gate it does not have, which the corpus already has a verdict for — §1.1not-applicable, attaching to a declared table — but which publishing the alias is what takes away: that runtime's suite walks each vendored file for any node carryingaliases.llm_securityand asserts every registered table is declared, so one aliased carrier id forcescodepoints/carriers.jsoninto a declared set of what is today the lexicon alone, obliging it to run all six cases and converting the three artifact-side ones into failures; and the entry point pinned for it inmeasurement.runtimes(scanForInjection) does not reach carriers at all, so carrier cases need a per-scope entry point this manifest expresses nowhere. Both runtimes already build their carrier sets fromcodepoints/carriers.json, so the divergence is in what a finding is called and where it can be observed, never in which code points are carriers.
Asked, not decided
-
The three objections went to both runtimes over coord on 2026-08-11 as a decision request, each asked the question only it can answer. Nothing was minted. A case id is contract surface consumers pin against, and publishing a single carrier alias is itself irreversible — it widens another runtime's declared table set by force of that runtime's own test suite. Minting first would have made a proposal into a fait accompli. The manifest records the request, so a later reader can tell "asked, unanswered" from "nobody asked".
-
A correction followed the request the same day, on our own error. The request asserted that the corpus had no third verdict for a case a runtime cannot reach. It has one — §1.1
not-applicable— and this repository wrote that section. The question was put before its own normative spec was re-read; the follow-up says so to both runtimes and restates the choice as mint-input-side-only, accept three standing failures, or publish a guard-only id space with nollm_securityalias at all.
[0.4.2] — 2026-08-11
No data file changed and no pattern moved. A runtime that passes 0.4.1 passes 0.4.2
unchanged; there is nothing here to re-measure. What the release adds is the rule set an outside
contributor could not previously read — including the reason the forge surface is shaped the way
it is.
Added
-
CONVENTIONS.md— the whole rule set a change here is held to, consolidated. Not new policy: the charter lives inCLAUDE.md, the versioning and vendoring rules inREADME.md, the reporting route inSECURITY.md, and the file conventions were visible only in the shape of the files. Collected because a convention that exists only in the maintainer's head is not one an outside reader can meet.Two things in it were previously inferable at best. Why pull requests are off: this repository is vendored into independent runtimes that pin a tag, so a change to detection data changes what they find, and that has to be coordinated with each consumer before it exists — which a merge button cannot do.
org-opsreached that conclusion on 2026-08-11 from a README line, and the conclusion was right; this file is the ground it was missing. When a value may change: the three mechanisms that have moved one so far — re-extraction, retraction, and owner-directed authoring — each named with thesource_fidelitykey that records it, and merit named explicitly as not on that list.It also carries the four offline checks that stand in for the CI this organisation does not have. Each was confirmed to go red on a violation, not merely green on a clean tree: a JSON file with no
version, aspec/file with no normative marker, and a planted.shwere each detected. A check that cannot fail proves nothing. The checks are shell one-liners rather than a script because a script would be.sh, and check 4 would fail on the tooling meant to enforce it. -
README.md— a short Contributing section pointing at it, carrying the pull-request answer inline so a reader who never opens the file still gets it. Same pattern the Reporting a wrong entry section followed forSECURITY.mdin0.3.1.The four
v0.4.1references in the install block and the layout table move tov0.4.2.
This closes the second half of what org-ops recorded as missing against the org standard on
2026-08-11. SECURITY.md was the first half, in 0.3.1.
[0.4.1] — 2026-08-11
No data file changed and no pattern moved. A number this repository published was wrong, and
it was wrong in our favour's opposite direction — the corrected figures are larger. A runtime
that passes 0.4.0 passes 0.4.1 unchanged.
Fixed
-
docs/lexicon-port-divergence.md(informative) — the ReDoS figures forhybrid-xss:iframe-srcread ~3× low, and the Pythonscript-tagfigure at 32 000 chars read ~4× low. Flagged byllm-ingestion-pipeline-security(coord, 2026-08-11T19:51:55Z), who measured the row themselves rather than citing ours.Their diagnosis was measurement surface — their composed
scan_lexicon()against our standalone regex. Checked, and that is not the cause: our standalone 100 000-char figure (7.86 s) sits close to their composed 8.95 s, so the two surfaces differ by far less than the error. Re-measured standalone, Python 3.14.0:iframe-src[^>]*is 822.7 ms at 32 000 chars and 51 477.4 ms at 256 000, against the published 119.6 ms and 16 857 ms. The Pythonscript-tagfigure at 256 000 chars does reproduce (5.44 s published, 5.22 s measured); the one at 32 000 chars does not (0.021 s against 0.087 s).The error ratios are not constant, so a single mis-sized input does not explain it, and the original harness lived in a previous session's scratchpad and no longer exists. The cause is recorded as not diagnosable rather than guessed at. The correction is a box in the document carrying the re-measured table, and the superseded figures are struck in place rather than quietly overwritten — a consumer who cited the old number needs to find out that they did.
Nothing about the
0.4.0decision depends on this. Every corrected figure is larger, the shape is unchanged (quadratic, ×4 per doubling), and both[^><]*forms remain flat under both engines. The0.4.0entry below still quotes the oldiframe-srcfigure; it is left as published, because that section is the record of what was released.
[0.4.0] — 2026-08-11
Two detection values changed, by two different mechanisms, and the difference between those mechanisms is the point of the release. One pattern table was re-extracted from a pinned upstream commit, the way every value in this repository has moved until now. Two lexicon rows were authored here at the source owner's direction, which has never happened before and required a reason that is not "we measured it and we were right."
A runtime that vendors this repository will see findings change. Any consumer asserting
byte-identity against v0.3.0 goes red by construction — lexicon/injection-lexicon.json changed
pattern text. Ids, labels, aliases, family membership, case ids and every count are unchanged.
Changed
-
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json0.7.0→0.8.0—hybrid-xss:script-tagandhybrid-xss:iframe-srcnarrow their unbounded negated class from[^>]*to[^><]*. Both forms are quadratic in scan length on input that repeats the tag prefix and never supplies a>: each occurrence is a match start and[^>]*scans to end of input from each one. Measured in Node v25.8.2 at 16k / 32k / 64k / 128k / 256k chars — script-tag 32.65 / 113.36 / 479.02 / 1988.83 / 7772.25 ms, iframe-src 39.23 / 131.76 / 574.94 / 2469.55 / 9449.94 ms, ×4 per doubling for both. Under[^><]*the same inputs cost 0.08–0.66 ms and 0.10–1.00 ms: flat, not merely faster.Why this is not commons correcting seed data. The dependency direction inverted. As of
llm-securitybe14867their four injection tables are built from this file and hold zero local regex literals — measured on their published surface at47905da, with their vendored copy of the lexicon confirmed byte-identical to0.7.0. So re-extraction was not available as a mechanism: there is no upstream literal left to re-read. They re-measured the finding rather than accepting it, rejected[^>]{0,256}because a bound is paddable and[^>]{1,256}because it drops bare<script>and two corpus cases with it, chose[^><]*, and asked commons to carry it. Recorded in a newsource_fidelity.owner_directed_changesblock — deliberately not inpost_extraction_drift, which would have said the source moved and commons followed, when the source now reads commons.Not decided by majority. The guard reached
[^><]first and independently (cff0437), so all three runtimes now agree, but a 3-of-3 count is not what moved this value and would not have been sufficient. The justification is the same one that kept commons on[^>]through0.7.0: this file tracks its declared source, and the declared source chose.Accepted cost, stated plainly: content carrying a literal
<between the tag name and the>(<script <x>,<script<div>) stops matching. Measured across all 90 conformance cases, not only the four that cite these ids: zero lost a match, zero gained one. The dropped class is real and unwitnessed by the corpus. -
signatures/secret-egress.json0.2.0→0.3.0— the one-entry staleness disclosed in0.2.0is closed by re-extraction, 18 → 19 patterns.OpenAI Legacy API Key(\bsk-[A-Za-z0-9]{20}T3BlbkFJ[A-Za-z0-9]{20}\b) enters atorder17, second to last;JWT (three-part token)moves to 18 and stays last, whichordering.last_entry_is_load_bearingrequires.Read out of the module text at a pinned public commit, never transcribed from the coord message that reported it — the message contained the regex, and that is exactly the path
evidence_limitshad ruled out.refs/heads/mainon the public remote is47905da;088e458carries the entry and was confirmed an ancestor withgit merge-base --is-ancestorrather than read off their log.A side effect worth more than the entry: all 19 positions were compared against the module — name, regex source, flags, order — with 0 divergences. Positions 0–16 came from a 2026-08-09 transcription whose module fidelity had stood recorded as llm-security's assertion rather than a reproduced result. It is now reproduced, and that
evidence_limitsbullet is retired along with the staleness one. -
conformance/manifest.json0.3.1→0.3.2— thesecret-egressblocker prose said its note would stand until the re-extraction landed. It landed, so item (2) (openai-api-key-legacyis a real hole here) is marked closed, and the entry count moves 18 → 19. The blocker itself does not close: 19 entries against the guard's 25 at different cut points is still a table reconciliation nobody has performed, and one closed hole is not that reconciliation. -
docs/lexicon-port-divergence.md(informative) — the[^>]vs[^><]row gets the number it never had for this side, and then gets closed. The guard disclosed that their[^><]is a measured ReDoS fix (cff0437), not a preference, and asked commons to measure its own form rather than take their word. Measured here in Node and Python:<script\b[^>]*>is quadratic in scan position on input that denies it a>— ×4.0 per doubling, 6.7 s at 256 000 chars against 0.41 ms for the guard's form.Counted across the whole lexicon rather than assumed from the one row: 8 of 83 patterns carry a bare
[^>], six of them bounded ({1,256}, measured linear) and two unbounded. The second unbounded one,hybrid-xss:iframe-src, had not been named by any party — 16.9 s at 256 000 chars.The finding was routed to the owning runtime, which is what
SECURITY.mdpromises an outsider would happen — the first time that route was walked from the inside. It came back as a decision the same day, and the document now records the closure with the invariant intact: the measurement travelled, the authority did not. Hadllm-securitydeclined, both rows would still read[^>]*and this file would record a permanent divergence instead.
[0.3.1] — 2026-08-11
No pattern changed value. One shipped table is disclosed as stale, and the repository gains
the reporting route it did not have. Nothing in patterns, expected.json or any id moved,
so a runtime that passes 0.3.0 passes 0.3.1 unchanged. Read the first entry anyway if you
vendor signatures/secret-egress.json: it now says, in the file, that it under-matches its own
source by one entry.
Added
-
SECURITY.md— the reporting route for a repository whose attack surface is data. It answers the question an ordinary security 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. Names what is in scope (a silent false negative, a fixture that sanctions a miss, an unsafe normative clause, a secret in the history, data gone stale against its source), what is a documented boundary rather than a vulnerability, and the two classes that skip the routing — a real secret, and data authored here rather than extracted. States plainly that fix latency is bounded by the owning runtime's schedule and the consumer's pull, not by this repository's.Written because
org-opsrecorded the file as missing against the org standard on 2026-08-11, and because four files here are detection data where a mistake is a detector that looks like it works.CONVENTIONS.md, recorded in the same message, is not in this release. -
README.md— a short Reporting a wrong entry section pointing at it. Without it the policy is a file nobody looking at the front page would know to open.
Changed
-
signatures/secret-egress.json0.1.0→0.2.0— a staleness disclosure, not a data change. All 18 patterns are byte-identical to0.1.0; one entry is added toprovenance.evidence_limits.llm-securityreports having taken the sourceSECRET_PATTERNSfrom 18 to 19 by addingOpenAI Legacy API Key. That is recorded as their report and explicitly not reproduced here — the commit carrying it is not on their public remote, which was measured atb1ba1fbon 2026-08-11. What was measured here: none of the 18 patterns matches a legacysk-…T3BlbkFJ…key shape. So a consumer vendoring this file under-matches the seed hook by one entry, on a live credential shape, and now reads that in the file rather than inferring it. It will be closed by re-extraction from a pinned public commit, never by authoring the entry here from a message. -
conformance/manifest.json0.3.0→0.3.1— thescope_planned.blockerstext forsignatures/secret-egress.jsonis corrected. Through0.3.0it ended by naminggcp-service-account-jsonandopenai-api-key-legacytogether as ids "absent here". They are two different kinds of fact, and one of them was misleading.Measured 2026-08-11, by running this file's own 18 patterns in
orderover a service-account document, against the guard at commite671edb: a complete GCP service-account key file is matched here, at order 11 (Private Key PEM Block— its(?:RSA |EC |DSA |OPENSSH )?prefix group is optional, so the bare PKCS#8 header such a file carries matches). The same document withprivate_keyremoved matches nothing here while the guard's marker pattern still fires. That is a cut-point difference — the guard detects the document marker, this table detects the key material — which is what the blocker is about, and not a missing entry.openai-api-key-legacy, by contrast, is a real hole here today, and is now recorded as one.The correction is folded into the existing blocker string rather than added as a sibling key:
blockersis a map from table path to text, and a second key under a table path would read as a second table to anything iterating it. -
docs/lexicon-port-divergence.md(informative) — the residual[^>]vs[^><]row gains a fuller witness set.llm-securitymeasured the three forms as totally ordered by what they match, each a strict superset of the next, and named two input classes the guard's narrower class drops (<script a="<" >x,<script<div>) beyond the one commons had recorded. Reproduced here independently, including the strict-superset property in both directions, before being written down.Their argument — that the narrower class buys an empty false-positive surface, since anything reaching
[^>]-and-not-[^><]already contains a literal<scripttag — is recorded as theirs and explicitly not what decided commons' form. Commons carries[^>]on provenance, and would have carried[^><]had the source been the guard's. Also records that they asked to hear the guard's reason for[^><]before commons shipped and commons shipped first, with why that order was deliberate.No data file touched;
v0.3.0is unaffected.
[0.3.0] — 2026-08-11
A detection pattern changed value. That has not happened in this repository before, and it
is the reason this is a release. 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; read the first entry below before upgrading, not the version number.
The lexicon 0.6.0 entry previously sitting under Unreleased is folded in here — it was
committed but never tagged, and 0.7.0 supersedes its central claim.
Changed
-
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json(0.5.1→0.7.0) —hybrid-xss:script-tagconverged onllm-security's current form.0.6.0 and earlier <script\b[^>]*>[\s\S]*?<\/script> closing tag REQUIRED 0.7.0 <script\b[^>]*> opening tag onlyByte-identical to
llm-security'sRegExp.prototype.sourceatb1ba1fb(scanners/lib/injection-patterns.mjs:170), verified by compiling both. They dropped the closing-tag requirement in90f576f(2026-08-10) because it was a recall hole:<script>alert(1)and<script src=x.js>both returned no finding.This is re-extraction, not revision, and the distinction is the whole justification. This repository's behaviour-preservation invariant forbids commons from correcting seed data it believes is wrong — that rule stands and was not weakened. It does not forbid re-reading the source after the source itself moved and its owner asked. The lexicon's declared provenance is
llm-security's injection table, and being loadable verbatim by that table's owner is the one thing it exists to do; the standing alternative was a per-pattern override inllm-security's own loader, i.e. a published core its source repository could not load as published.Direction matters for what it cannot break: the new form matches a strict superset of the old one, so relative to
0.6.0it can add matches and cannot introduce a false negative. The reverse change would not have been adoptable on the same reasoning.Operator decision, 2026-08-11, on
llm-security's blocking request. Explicitly not decided by the 2-of-3 majority across the three ports: a count of implementations is not a mandate over detection data, and the provenance argument would hold with the guard on either side.Measured collateral: none. The full corpus was run under both patterns — 84/84 lexicon-scoped cases pass under
0.7.0, and exactly one case's finding set differs between the two forms (the new one below). The widening added no finding to any other case's input.source_fidelityrestructured to keep its numbers coordinate-bearing:patterns_byte_identical_to_sourcekeeps its key and its value (83) and gains the field it was missing,byte_identical_against_commit: b1ba1fb. Against the original extraction commitb0de0cathis file is now 82/83, recorded ascount_against_extraction_commit.post_extraction_drift— added in the folded-in0.6.0to record the then-open divergence — is now markedstatus: resolved in 0.7.0 by re-extractionand carries the before/after pattern text, so a consumer diffing against either commit has a coordinate for what it finds. -
conformance/manifest.json(0.2.0→0.3.0) —case_id_derivationextended with an optional variant suffix.before case_id = <pattern_id, ':' → '__'> after case_id = <pattern_id, ':' → '__'> [ '--' <variant-slug> ] reverse truncate at first '--', then '__' → ':'No existing case id moved, so this is additive.
--was measured absent from all 83 ratified pattern ids and all 89 pre-existing case ids, which keeps the reverse transform purely lexical — no lookup against the id list — the property the original one-to-one rule was protecting.The
one_case_per_pattern_idkey is removed, superseded bycase_id_derivation.variant_suffix.supersedes, which quotes its text. It was documentation of the constraint, not data a consumer matches on, but it is called out here because a removed key is normally a breaking change in this repository.omitted_payloadsgainsderivation_ground_withdrawn_in_0_3_0: the guard's seventh active-content payload was omitted on two grounds, and this change retires one of them. The other stands, so the payload stays omitted — on one ground instead of two. It was not added back; that is a separate decision, not a consequence of this one.
Added
-
conformance/hybrid-xss__script-tag--src-no-close/(89 → 90 cases) — input<script src=x.js>, 17 bytes, expectinghybrid-xss:script-tag. The regression gate for the change above, and the reason the corpus could not previously see it: the existinghybrid-xss__script-taginput<script>steal()</script>matches the pattern under both forms, so it passes either way. Reverting the pattern to its0.6.0form fails this case and only this case — mutation-verified in both directions across all 90.The first case input authored in this repository rather than reproduced verbatim from a runtime's payload set, recorded in the new
authored_payloadsblock rather than folded intopayload_provenance, whose value is precisely the claim that its inputs are verbatim upstream. That claim stays exactly as strong as it was: 83 of 83. Both witnesses for this axis were named byllm-securityon 2026-08-10; this is the first of the two. Findings measured through the guard's public API at0dce50f/0.5.0, with the existing case's committed bytes and digest reproduced by the same harness in the same run as a control. -
schema/conformance-declaration.schema.json(0.1.0) — the shape a runtime publishes alongside a conformance result, satisfying the §1.1 MUST thatv0.2.0created and left without a form. Requested byllm-securityin those terms (runtime, commit measured, implemented file paths) with the stated reason that two runtimes publishing free-form declarations makes83/83 + 6 not-applicableunparseable by anyone but its author.Carries the two arithmetic invariants §1.1 implies but cannot state unambiguously in prose: the four verdict counts MUST sum to the total, and the total MUST equal the corpus case count at the commit measured. Requires the enumeration arrays whenever their counts are non-zero, which turns §1.1's "MUST still be enumerated" from prose into a schema failure. Keeps
errorandnot_applicablestructurally distinct, per §1.1. Recordsdeclaration_source— whether the declared set is derived from the runner's own constant or hand-maintained beside it — because only the derived form makes the anti-narrowing fence structural. Deliberately not a gate: nothing in this repository runs, and no validation was asked for. Mutation-tested: the example validates, and five distinct defect classes are rejected. -
spec/conformance-corpus.md§1.1 — normative pointer to that schema, plus a SHOULD that a runtime derive its declared set from the constant its runner uses to accept or reject ascope, and record which it did.
Fixed
docs/lexicon-port-divergence.md— thehybrid-xss:script-tagrow is closed on the closing-tag axis, having reversed twice in three days (guard-diverges → commons-diverges → converged). What remains open is the one-byte span difference: the guard excludes<from its negated class and the other two do not, so<script <x>matches commons andllm-securityand not the guard. Measured by compiling all three forms, not reasoned from the character classes; neither side has claimed it.
[0.2.0] — 2026-08-11
The contract gained a normative MUST, which is why this is a release rather than a
metadata commit: 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. In 0.x that is a minor bump by
the rules, but it is breaking in substance, and a consumer reading only the version number
should learn that here rather than from a failing suite.
Everything below this heading was previously listed as unreleased.
Retracted
-
The claim that the Python guard's port cites
severity.mjsfor hybrid severity. It is false. It was carried in three places —lexicon/injection-lexicon.json(families[hybrid].severity_provenance.not_from),docs/lexicon-port-divergence.md(§ Severity: the 8 hybrid patterns), and the[0.1.0]entry below — and it was never measured here. It restated an assertion received fromllm-security(coord message20260809T201048Z) as a commons finding.Measured against the guard's own tree, which
llm-ingestion-pipeline-securityasked for twice before this was checked:severity.mjshas never appeared insrc/llm_ingestion_guard/injection_lexicon.jsonat any point in that file's history (git log -Sreturns no commits), and at0bf0729— the commitconformance/manifest.jsonpins — the only tree-wide occurrence isdocs/PLAN.md:114, correctly attributing the report module tooutput.mjs+severity.mjs. The guard's only source statement for the lexicon is thenoteatinjection_lexicon.json:3, and it namesinjection-patterns.mjs.No detection data moves.
families[hybrid].severityis stillhigh, still sourced toinjection-patterns.mjs:274-281, re-verified atb0de0ca;severity.mjsstill contains zero occurrences ofCRITICAL_PATTERNS,HIGH_PATTERNS,MEDIUM_PATTERNSandHYBRID_PATTERNS, re-measured the same day. Only the sentence about the other repository falls.The retraction is marked in place rather than edited away, and it is worth naming why this one survived review: the claim arrived bundled with a correct measurement of the same question, from a repository that had done its half properly. The correct half carried the incorrect half past the check — which is precisely the defect
severity_provenance.not_fromwas written to warn about, one level up.
Added
-
not-applicable, a third conformance verdict (spec/conformance-corpus.md§1.1). A runtime now declares the set of commons data files it implements; a case whosescopenames a file outside that set isnot-applicablerather than failed. §1 alone would have reported an architectural difference as a defect — one seeding runtime has no active-content table and never will, and 7 permanent failures say nothing a reader can use. The verdict is fenced so it cannot become an exit: it attaches to a table, never to a case (per-case opt-out is the silent skip §1 forbids), a declared set MUST NOT be narrowed to convert failures intonot-applicable, and such cases MUST still be enumerated rather than dropped from the denominator. §8 now states the consequence: a pass count is unreadable without the declared set beside it. -
Six active-content conformance cases —
active__markdown-image,active__markdown-link,active__reference-link,active__autolink,active__raw-html,active__data-uri. The corpus goes 83 → 89, andscope_coveredgainssignatures/active-content.json.Generated from measurement, not written: payload strings were extracted from the seed runtime's
coverage.pyby AST — evaluating each_scan_caseargument in that module's own namespace rather than retyping detection data — then run through its public output gate. The fixtures were then re-read from disk by a separate checker that re-computed every digest, re-scanned the bytes and appliedexact-within-scopeindependently of the generator, because a generator agreeing with itself proves nothing: 6 cases, 0 failed checks.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 — which is less than cross-runtime agreement and more than nothing.
-
signatures/active-content.json0.1.0 → 0.2.0 — apattern_id_spaceblock. Unlike the lexicon's, nothing was constructed:label_formatand theconstructskeys were already extracted verbatim, and their concatenation is what the seed runtime emits. The block states an id space the file already had implicitly, and records that it is ratified by one runtime rather than two.
Changed
-
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json0.5.0 → 0.5.1 — provenance metadata only; no pattern, id, alias, family or severity value changes. -
conformance/manifest.json0.1.1 → 0.2.0 — the six cases,scope_covered,count_by_scope, separate provenance and measurement blocks for the active-content half (a different source structure at a different commit; one pin must not stand for two measurements), andscope_planned.blockers. -
spec/conformance-corpus.md§4 no longer claims scoping "asks a question both can answer." That held only while every case was scoped to the one table both runtimes implement, and stopped being true the moment a case was scoped to a single-runtime table. Scope narrows what is compared; it does not make every runtime a valid addressee. The superseded sentence is named in place rather than edited away.
Fixed
-
§4 now states that "belongs to a data file" means published there, never "shares its prefix." The distinction has a live witness: the seed runtime emits
active:oversize-input, a self-safety flag about its own scan cap, which carries theactive:prefix but is no construct insignatures/active-content.json. A prefix-matching runtime would pull it into the comparison and fail a case over a finding the corpus makes no claim about. Recorded in that file underpattern_id_space.not_every_active_labelas well. -
§6 now states the derivation's cost.
case_idderives frompattern_idalone, so a single-finding scope holds at most one case per pattern id — there is nowhere in the name for a second. The seed runtime's matrix drives two payloads atactive: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. It was dropped rather than given a discriminated id, which would have broken the reverse transform, and it is named inconformance/manifest.jsonunderomitted_payloadsso that 6 built from 7 offered reads as a decision rather than a miscount.
Measured, not shipped
-
The remaining four cases are blocked on two distinct unresolved questions, now recorded under
scope_planned.blockersinstead of the earlier blanket "no runtime has agreed to an id space". That framing was wrong for both:- Carriers (3). No adoptable id space, and a second problem underneath. The guard emits
two stage-coupled labels for one carrier —
sanitize:zero-widthon input,output:zero-width-presenton output, same split for bidi and unicode-tag — while llm-security emits prose titles. A commons id must be invented stage-neutral, which no other id space here required. And sinceexact-within-scopecompares a finding set, an id aliasing both labels makes the verdict depend on which entry point the runtime was measured through — an entry-point dependence the lexicon cases do not have. - Secret egress (1). Not an id-naming 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 Tokenis four ids there,Private Key PEM Blockthree,Database connection stringfour), with membership diverging both ways.aws-access-key-idis the one clean 1:1 — which is why exactly one egress case was ever offered. That number was a symptom, not modesty. A shared id space presupposes a table reconciliation nobody has done.
- Carriers (3). No adoptable id space, and a second problem underneath. The guard emits
two stage-coupled labels for one carrier —
[0.1.0] — 2026-08-10
Initial extraction. Runtime-neutral detection data, the finding contract, and a conformance
corpus, extracted from the llm-security Node implementation and a Python guard without
behaviour change — that invariant is the release, not a caveat on it.
What the tag is worth resting on: seven of the eight JSON artefacts were rebuilt from the
commons file alone and diffed against their source implementation, three of them against the
source module at a pinned commit. The eighth says verified: false about itself. The corpus
holds 83 cases on which both seeding runtimes were measured agreeing exactly.
What it is not: spec/decode-pipeline.md does not exist, and the corpus constrains one of
the seven data files. Both absences are named in Not included rather than papered over.
Added
-
conformance/— 83 cases, one per injection-lexicon pattern, plusmanifest.json. Each case is a directory holdinginput.txt(the exact bytes, no trailing newline) andexpected.json(the findings, named by commons patternid).Both seeding runtimes were measured producing the same lexicon finding set on all 83, through their public entry points —
scanForInjection()atb0de0caandscan_output(source=OUTPUT)at0bf0729— with labels mapped to commons ids through the lexicon's ownaliasesblock. Not through rebuilt regex tables: a table-level comparison yields a number that describes neither runtime, which is the mistake the divergence document had to retract.The 13 divergent patterns are in, unmarked, and that is the substantive result. Their divergence was measured on witness inputs — an attribute run padded past 256 characters, an interior
<, an unclosed<script>— and none of those shapes occurs in a corpus payload. All 13 agree on their own case input. Nobody had to pick whose recall cost becomes the contract, because the question was never reachable from these inputs. A per-case caveat would have asserted a doubt the measurement disproves.Inputs are the guard's
coverage.pypayloads, reproduced verbatim. One runtime authored them; what makes them a cross-runtime corpus is the measurement through the other, and the manifest records the asymmetry rather than averaging it away. -
spec/conformance-corpus.md— normative. How a case is read:input.txtis bytes and is not to be trimmed or re-encoded,expected.jsonnames findings bypattern_idonly (severity and OWASP anchor are looked up in the lexicon, never restated), andexact-within-scoperequires equality restricted to the data files the case names.The field is
pattern_id, notid, because this repository already publishes an unrelated findingid:schema/finding.schema.jsondefines it asDS-<scanner>-<counter>from a process-global counter — stable across neither runs nor processes. Two normative documents using one word for a stable rule identity and a volatile per-emission sequence number would have produced runtimes failing every case for reasons unrelated to detection. §3.1 states the distinction and publishes the bridge a runtime actually needs: its own label maps to apattern_idthrough the lexicon'saliasesobject, and a runtime absent from that object has no published way to be compared at all.Scoping is what makes exactness safe — the two runtimes do not implement the same set of tables, so a whole-report comparison would fail for reasons unrelated to the pattern under test. Exactness is what makes the corpus worth running — a contains-only corpus is passed by a runtime that flags everything.
observed_out_of_scopeis evidence, never expectation, and an absent runtime key means unmeasured, not measured-empty.The document also states the one place this repository's "every JSON file carries a top-level
version" convention does not apply: fixtures are versioned as a corpus, inconformance/manifest.json. Stated rather than left to be discovered. -
schema/finding.schema.json— the finding contract plus the SARIF output profile. Normative. Closed against the producer in 0.2.0; the JSONL profile isnot applicable. -
signatures/active-content.json— the EchoLeak class (CVE-2025-32711): 17 patterns, severities, opacity floors and pass order, from the Python guard. -
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json— 83 prompt-injection patterns in four families (21 critical, 32 high, 22 medium, 8 hybrid). -
codepoints/carriers.json— six carrier tables: zero-width characters, the Unicode Tags block, the Supplementary Private Use Areas, BIDI controls, the Cyrillic presence set and the 28-entry fold-to-Latin homoglyph map. -
signatures/secret-egress.json— the 18 fixed credential and token shapes. Array order is normative. -
mapping/owasp-map.json— four taxonomy maps (LLM, ASI, AST, MCP) over one shared 16-prefix key set. -
calibration/calibration.json— risk-score tier constants, verdict thresholds, risk-band cutoffs, posture grade thresholds. -
signatures/malware-signatures.json— the known-bad-identity table for theSIGclass: seven signatures over four families (webshell,reverse_shell,cryptominer,hacktool), reproduced verbatim fromknowledge/signatures.jsonatb0de0ca, key order included, with the source file's byte length and SHA-256 pinned inprovenance.The rules were the easy half. The file's substance is the line between the table and the engine, drawn in
engine_behaviour_not_data: no rule carries aflagsfield, because the engine compiles every pattern withiunconditionally — so a consumer that compiles these case-sensitively silently under-matches all seven. Each pattern is also run against five decode variants, not just raw bytes; rules are filtered by an enabled-families policy; a rule fires once per file; operator rules are merged at scan time; and the loader defaults four missing fields rather than rejecting a rule. None of that travels with the data, and all of it changes what a consumer sees.Two honesty notes are in
evidence_limitsrather than in prose. Seven signatures are not malware coverage — a cleanSIGresult 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 papers over this by excludingknowledge/,tests/,docs/andnode_modules/from the scan, which is engine behaviour and does not come with the table.Verified: 7/7 rule objects field-identical to source including key order, no non-ASCII bytes, and all seven compile in Node bare,
iandiu(21/21) and in Pythonre(7/7). Note the exact family spellings —reverse_shell, notreverse-shell, andcryptominer, notminer; they are policy keys, and the working note that seeded this file had both wrong.
Verification
Every file above except calibration.json was proven rather than transcribed: the data was
rebuilt from the commons JSON alone and diffed against the source implementation. Each
file records its own result and its own limits.
calibration/calibration.json carries verified: false. Its source arrived as a prose
summary rather than as code, so no differential check was possible, and the file names the
checks that were not run instead of attaching a caveat to a pass.
The corpus was verified the same way the data was — by a harness that does not share the
generator's knowledge. It reads only the case directories, re-runs both runtimes on the bytes
it finds there, and checks every field of every expected.json, digests included: 83
cases, 0 failures. Two further checks, because a corpus that cannot fail is not evidence:
commons' family severity matches the severity the guard emits per finding, 83/83; and
deleting the middle third of each input breaks 76 of 83 expectations. The 7 survivors are
the shortest payloads, where the mutation leaves the trigger intact — that is a weak
mutation, not a weak fixture, and it is recorded as such rather than rounded up.
-
docs/lexicon-port-divergence.md— informative. A differential comparison of the two ports ofinjection-patterns.mjs(this repository's and the Python guard's): 83/83 patterns correspond, 64 are byte-identical, 6 differ only by escaping and are proven equivalent, and 13 behave differently, with a witness input for each and misses on both sides. The cause is two different ReDoS mitigations of one table. No data file was changed — behaviour preservation holds and the finding is reported to the owning repositories.Revised 2026-08-09 with one retraction. The document claimed that neither runtime misses an attack, on the grounds that every witness payload still produced a finding. It does miss. That measurement ran the payloads against the union of every pattern table this repository holds, and the rescuing hit came from
active-content.json— the Python guard's table.llm-securityhas no active-content table at all, so a union of commons tables was read as a statement about each runtime separately. Re-measured throughllm-security's ownscanForInjection()atb0de0ca, all three witness payloads returnfound: false— no finding whatsoever — while controls in the same run behave normally. Three confirmed recall holes, whichllm-securityattributes to its v7.8.3 #24 ReDoS hardening and has logged as a v8.x task.Also corrected: one of the 13 divergences does not reach report level, because the guard's
hybrid-xss:javascript-urifires on the same witness at the same severity and anchor. The report-level number is 12. And thehybridseverity question that the document reported rather than resolved is now closed — the reported hint was right, the citation behind it was not.Revised again 2026-08-10. The document said 13 was the number blocking
conformance/, since a fixture names labels. It blocks a fixture written over a witness input, and the corpus contains none — all 13 agree on their own case input. The divergence itself stands unresolved and unchanged; what was wrong was the claim about what it blocked.Corrections are marked in place rather than edited away.
Changed
-
schema/finding.schema.json0.1.0 → 0.2.0 — the schema is closed. It was seeded fromsarif-formatter.mjs, which consumes findings, so its property list could only ever be a lower bound andadditionalPropertieshad to stay open. The producer is now known —finding()inscanners/lib/output.mjs, line 32 — and it returns an object literal with exactly ten keys and no spread:id,scanner,severity,title,description,file,line,evidence,owasp,recommendation.additionalPropertiesisfalse, and the two keys the old schema never knew about (id,evidence) are added.idgets its own definition:DS-<prefix>-<counter>, pattern^DS-[A-Za-z]+-[0-9]{3,}$. The{3,}is deliberate —padStart(3, '0')is a minimum, so a run emitting more than 999 findings produces four digits. The id comes from a process-global counter, so it is stable neither across runs nor across processes, and the definition says so before someone keys on it.Nullability is now evidence rather than convention. Five keys are emitted as
nullrather than omitted (opts.x || null), so a serialised finding always carries all ten. The exception is the four assigned straight fromopts: omitdescriptionand the key isundefinedand vanishes from the JSON. Verified by calling the real producer — ten keys in memory, nine after serialisation.owaspis a string, not an array, and not one code. Multiple codes are joined with,. Measured across the seed runtime: 31 distinct values over 157 emission sites, 13 of them multi-code, and four mix taxonomies inside a single value (LLM06, ASI02and friends) with no discriminator saying which is which. That sharpens the edition problemmapping/owasp-map.jsonalready records, and it has a consequence nobody had written down:sarif-formatter.mjsbuildstags: [f.owasp], so a finding anchored to two taxonomies produces one SARIF tag with a comma in it. Nothing filtering onLLM06will match. Reproduced end to end through the realfinding()andtoSARIF(), and logged asknown_lossiness.owasp-tag-not-split— consumer behaviour inllm-security, not data, so it is reported rather than fixed here.The JSONL profile is
not applicable, notunspecified— the distinction is the point.unspecifiedwould claim a profile exists and merely has not been written down. No finding-JSONL exists: findings are emitted only inside a single JSON envelope (output.mjs:140). The one module that does write JSONL,audit-trail.mjs, writes audit events under a different schema — whereowaspis an array. Same field name, different type, same repository. A consumer reading both through one code path will be wrong about one of them, so the profile records the trap instead of leaving a TODO.Verified: the schema is valid Draft 2020-12, every finding built by the real producer validates against it, and four negative controls (extra property, missing
id, malformedid, unknown severity) are all rejected.One new open question, unpatched by design: the producer's JSDoc lists seventeen scanner prefixes including
IDE, while all four maps inmapping/owasp-map.jsonare keyed on sixteen without it. AnIDEfinding has no taxonomy mapping in any map. Adding the key would be inventing detection data. -
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json0.4.0 → 0.5.0 — the last null in the file is filled and the id space is ratified. Two blockers close, no detection data moves.families[hybrid].severitywasnull, deliberately, because the seed dump did not supply it. It ishigh— and the interesting part is where that is written. The hybrid family has no severity field anywhere; the engine assigns one by pushingHYBRID_PATTERNSmatches straight into thehighbucket atinjection-patterns.mjs:274-281. Both this repository and the Python guard had first looked inseverity.mjs, which contains no injection-family severity at all. The guard's port holds the right value behind that wrong citation, soseverity_provenance.not_fromrecords the miss explicitly: a wrong citation to a right value is the harder defect to catch later.Correction 2026-08-10 (see Unreleased): the two sentences about the guard's citation are false and were never measured here. The guard's port cites
injection-patterns.mjs, the right file. Everything above aboutseverity.mjscontaining no injection-family severity, and about where the value actually lives, stands and has been re-measured.pattern_id_space.not_yet_confirmedis replaced byratification. Both seeding runtimes agreed on 2026-08-09 —llm-securityratified 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.idis now a cross-runtime contract, which is whatconformance/was waiting on to be able to name a finding.alias_evidence.llm_securityis sharpened rather than upgraded. All 83 alias strings were confirmed equal to the module'slabelfield, in order — so the alias is certainly the pattern's name in the table. It is still not established that a finding carries it: the producer isoutput.mjs:finding(), which emitstitleand has nolabelkey at all. Verified at table level, one level short of where it would matter. Match onid. -
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json0.3.0 → 0.4.0 — verified against the source module instead of against the dump it was transcribed from, and two false provenance claims retracted. The source is now pinned:b0de0caon the public remote, imported in Node and compared entry by entry onsource,flagsandlabel.The result is 83/83 byte-identical to source, which is not what the file previously claimed. It said two patterns had been rewritten from raw code points into
\uXXXXescapes; the module already writes them escaped, so nothing had been rewritten. The stored pattern text was right the whole time — only the account of where it came from was wrong. The dump had rendered the module's escapes as the characters they denote, and this repository re-escaped them, arriving at the correct bytes by way of an incorrect story.The same inversion ran the other way in
multi-lang:french, which carried the class spelled with a raw accented Latinewhere the module writes it as the escape\u00e9inside the same character class. That was the one pattern of 83 not byte-identical to source, and it is corrected. The two spellings are the same regular expression — verified in Node bare and underu, and in Pythonre, over accented, unaccented, uppercase and non-matching French input, with identical match offsets — so no behaviour moved. No pattern in the file contains a non-ASCII byte now, matching the module, whose regex literals are pure ASCII throughout.Structurally:
normalisationsis now[]with anormalisations_note, matching the convention already used insignatures/secret-egress.json, and a newsource_fidelityblock carries the counts, the method, the verified class membership, and both retractions in full. Retracted claims are recorded rather than deleted — the earlier equivalence evidence (692 Node comparisons, 236 Python) remains true, it is simply no longer load-bearing. -
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json0.2.0 → 0.3.0 — the two aliases are no longer presented as equally backed.pattern_id_space.alias_evidencenow records each one separately:llm_ingestion_guardis verified (the guard's coverage matrix asserts on that exact string, so it is demonstrably what a guard finding carries), whilellm_securityis not — it is the pattern table's own name, and the finding producer was never supplied, with the known Node finding shape usingtitlerather thanlabel. Averaging the two into one file-level claim would have repeated the defect this repository corrects per-table elsewhere.Also:
normalisations[].affectsnow keys onidwith the prose names kept beside it asaffects_labels. An internal cross-reference on label was a second identity space inside the file the id was added to unify. -
lexicon/injection-lexicon.json0.1.0 → 0.2.0 — every pattern gains a commons-ownedidand analiasesobject naming what each seeding runtime calls it, plus a top-levelpattern_id_spaceblock explaining the field. This exists because aconformance/fixture has to name a finding and the two runtimes do not name the same pattern the same way.The id was adopted verbatim from the guard's port, which already carried both names, rather than invented here. Matching was by
label↔descwith em-dash normalised to hyphen: 83/83, one-to-one, ids unique.No detection data moved. Labels, patterns and flags are byte-identical in sequence, no
flagskey was invented (78 before, 78 after), and stripping the three new fields reproduces the previous committed file byte for byte — 23 566 bytes, identical. All 83 patterns still compile in Node bare and underu(166/166) and in Pythonre(83/83).Neither
llm-securitynor the guard has ratified this id space yet; both were asked by coord on 2026-08-09, and the file says so rather than implying agreement.
Not included
spec/decode-pipeline.md— needs the decode implementation. A normative spec inferred from a data dump would be worse than an absent one.- Conformance for the other four tables. The corpus covers the injection lexicon only.
The carrier, active-content and secret-egress tables have 11 convertible cases waiting in
the guard's matrix, and no ratified cross-runtime finding id between them — writing those
fixtures would mint a contract unilaterally, in the same stroke as the tag. Named in
conformance/manifest.jsonunderscope_planned. - The 29 non-convertible cases of the guard's 134 assert a runtime's API surface — that
a Python call raises
OKFPathError, that a disposition engine composes two findings a particular way. This repository does not own an API, so those belong to the guard's suite.
spec/decode-pipeline.md is named in the README as planned rather than linked, so nothing
in the repository points at a file that does not exist.