Operator finding 2026-08-15: the live site still said 'v0.9 — frozen
while under journal review' and advertised the superseded v0.1/v0.2
drafts. Fixed at the source:
- webdocs.py paper card: v0.10, revised August 2026 (version now also
printed on the PDF title page); the divergence description gains its
closure (the sn=0 conjunct, zero divergences, three-way regression);
the freeze-era reconciliation card shrunk to a tight snapshot-vs-today
paragraph; fragile '12 Jupyter lectures' count dropped
- web.py: /paper serves the current paper only; all old-variant routes
404 (git history retains the drafts); ltl-v0.1/v0.2 files removed from
the working tree, paper/README updated
- ltl.tex: title page now reads 'Revised: August 2026 — v0.10' (the
version travels IN the PDF, per operator order); rebuilt
- tests updated to ENFORCE the retirement (all old variants must 404);
full suite 152 passed
The deployed consistency verifier implemented the RFC 9162 2.1.4.2
bit-navigation loop but its final return checked only the two
reconstructed roots, omitting the terminal condition that the new-size
navigation counter reach zero. That condition couples the consumed proof
length to the claimed tree sizes; without it, a valid proof for one
transition verifies under a lied (power-of-two) old size. Flagship: a
valid 2->3 proof is accepted under the false claim 1->3 with the size-2
root.
Fix: add `and sn == 0` to the final return.
This is the corpus's Known Gap 14 (3,867 deployed-accepts-only cases in a
pinned 73,573-case family, recorded in public log entry 13). It was
found by the project's own differential harness; a post-appeal review
round added a faithful RFC oracle as a third comparison, which showed
the deployed verifier — not the mechanized model — was the one deviating
from RFC 9162, and traced it to the missing terminal check.
Scope: verify_consistency's only production caller is the consumer-side
pin store, reached only behind a verified head signature. Generation is
RFC-correct and unaffected; the live provider service does not run this
verifier; the published standalone verify.py has no consistency verifier.
An empirical search found 0 realizable pin-advance poisons against an
honestly pinned consumer, consistent with Known Gap 14's non-claim.
Verification:
- New fail-first three-way regression test
test_consistency_lied_size_three_way_agreement (deployed / recursive
ConsRec model / independent faithful RFC 9162 transliteration) over the
honest AND lied-size families; fails pre-fix, passes post-fix.
- Historical differential tests (164,479 inclusion; 164,224 consistency)
unchanged — the fix rejects nothing honest.
- Full suite: 145 passed, 0 failed.
Public log entry 13, the attested accumulator commit, and the IACR
submission PDF are all unchanged. Vulnerable state tagged
vulnerable/sn0-consistency-fd2f6ba. See
docs/security-2026-07-23-consistency-terminal-check.md.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
REAL DEFECT found by the operator-ordered doc-freshness audit:
published_assets.py still carried the PRE-HARDENING fail-open verify.py
and the pre-Tier-2 README as the templates that log-publish drops into
the mirror — the next publish would have silently overwritten the
round-13-hardened fail-closed verifier and the corrected README with
the old versions. Fixed:
- published_assets.py regenerated from the canonical mirror files
(byte-identity verified by round-trip exec), now also carrying
verify_selftest.py; SYNC RULE documented in the module docstring.
- transparency_log.publish() now writes verify_selftest.py too.
- NEW tests/test_published_assets.py pins the security-critical markers
(fail-closed FATAL, RECEIPT_TYPE, verify_receipt, --all receipt
coverage, required fingerprint) so template drift fails CI instead of
shipping.
- test_web_and_witness updated to the hardened verifier's markers —
the published test log now passes FULL signature mode end to end
('RESULT: OK [full]'), a stronger assertion than the old string.
Doc refresh in the same pass:
- llms.txt: thirteen leaves + entry-13 self-attestation + fail-closed
verifier; paper line -> new title, 23 pages, v0.2/v0.1 archives.
- Course (generator + generated 06b notebook): 'the git hash IS the
content hash' -> 'the commit pins the exact source tree';
'irrevocably part of the log every other agent sees' -> 'committed to
the log's signed view, which any agent can compare' (the two Tier-2
scope corrections had never reached the teaching material).
- test_paper_verifiers.py docstring rescoped: its 164k counts are the
archived v0.2 report's citation; the current paper cites the corpus
harness and makes no extensional-equality claim.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Re-auditing the prior (Opus-produced) depth pass adversarially found and
fixed three genuine issues:
1. OVERCLAIM (serious): §5.3 said the consistency verifier was
differential-tested 'on all (n0,n1) with n1<=256' but the script only
SAMPLED sizes (5,508 cases). Ran the genuinely exhaustive test — all
1<=n0<=n1<=256, honest + 4 mutations — 164,224 invocations, and the
inclusion verifier likewise (164,479). Paper now states the true scope
and counts; both are pinned in a new CI test (test_paper_verifiers.py,
104 tests) so the numbers cannot rot.
2. PROOF IMPRECISION: Lemma 2 (Root binding) was applied to ConsRec's
first component, which PASSES THROUGH (no hnode) at some levels and so
is not the hash-fold the lemma needs. Reworked: Lemma 2 now defined
over 'hash-folds' only; Theorem 3 restructured into 3 clean steps that
put only the full-hashing second component through the lemma, then
argue algebraically + one honest-tree collision. Also hoisted Lemma 2
above Theorem 2 and made Theorem 2 invoke it (was inlined), so the
'two theorems share the lemma' remark is now true; deduped the remark.
3. MISLABELED TABLE: Table 1's 'files vs upstream' column actually held
line-diffs against different baselines. Dropped it for clean comparable
columns (files / apex axioms / SHA-512 shape); the diff story stays in
the portability paragraph where each baseline is named.
17 pages, all refs resolve, 104 tests green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
