0%
Chat
← Back to all posts

✅ RPAS‑CM Law Hardening Protocol

•8 min read•0 views•
ADPAGovernanceRPAS

Source: governance/RPAS-LAW-HARDENING.md — branch adpa-project-charter, repository mdresch/adpa.

✅ RPAS‑CM Law Hardening Protocol

Purpose

This document defines the mandatory process for transitioning governance laws from definition to enforcement. It ensures that laws are proven safe, deterministic, and non-destructive before they can block execution.

Core Principle:

Laws must be proven before they are enforced.
One enforced law is worth more than ten theoretical ones.

Lawful system posture & the administrator role

System hardening in RPAS terms is the upgrade toward a lawful system: governance rules are expressed where possible as mechanical checks (validators, API validation, database transition rules, orchestration invariants)—constraints that behave like deterministic invariants (same state → same verdict), not as informal policy that any privileged account can ignore.

Administrator role: The administrator must not be enabled to bypass those requirements. The role transitions from a classical super‑administrator (implicit omnipotence) to a law governor: defining and changing law only through governed rituals, while execution remains subject to the same mechanical laws as everyone else. If the system was never designed to grant a path, mechanical enforcement prevents anyone—including an administrator—from treating that path as available.

Law change and tokens: A change of law is itself a governed mutation. After definition and hardening phases permit it, requests for validation (against the manifest, ledger, transition matrix, and related validators) must succeed before cryptographic authority tokens are issued. Tokens prove that the work is scoped to what validation allowed under the current law set; they are the bridge between human decisions about law and machine‑enforceable permission to act.

1. Law Lifecycle Phases

Every RPAS law progresses through these phases:

Phase Name Description Blocking?
0 Definition Law is written, not implemented No
1 Instrumentation Validators, middleware, telemetry created No
2 Shadow Evaluation Law runs in parallel, logs violations No
3 Evidence Collection Metrics gathered, false positives identified No
4 Validation Law proven safe, no negative side effects No
5 Constitutional Enforcement Law blocks violations, tokens denied Yes

Critical Rule:

Skipping phases 2–4 creates governance-induced system failure, which RPAS explicitly forbids.

2. Phase Details

Phase 0: Definition

Status: Law written as policy document
Blocking: No
Artifacts: Markdown governance document (e.g., RPAS-COL.md, RPAS-TCL.md)

Exit Criteria:

  • Law text is complete and unambiguous
  • Violation codes defined
  • Related laws identified
  • Human review completed

Phase 1: Instrumentation

Status: Technical implementation created
Blocking: No
Artifacts: C# validators, middleware, services

Exit Criteria:

  • Validator class implemented
  • Violation codes programmatically generated
  • Logging/telemetry hooks in place
  • Unit tests for validator logic pass

Phase 2: Shadow Evaluation (Critical)

Status: Law runs in parallel with execution
Blocking: No — violations logged but not enforced
Mode: Pre-Authoritative Law Evaluation

Implementation:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    REQUEST INCOMING                         │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                              │
                              ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                 EXECUTION CHANNEL (Current)                  │
│  - Executes as today                                         │
│  - No enforcement applied                                    │
│  - Returns normal result                                     │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                              │
                              ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│               EVALUATION CHANNEL (Shadow)                   │
│  - Runs full CP7 validation logic                            │
│  - Generates violation codes                                 │
│  - Emits warnings, logs, telemetry                           │
│  - Does NOT block execution                                  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                              │
                              ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    COMPARISON LOG                            │
│  - Would this request have been blocked?                     │
│  - If yes, why?                                              │
│  - Was that block desirable?                                 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Exit Criteria:

  • Shadow channel runs for minimum 7 days
  • All violation types observed at least once
  • No unexplained violations
  • False positive rate < 0.1%

Phase 3: Evidence Collection

Status: Metrics gathered and analyzed
Blocking: No

Mandatory Metrics:

Metric Target Current
Total requests evaluated — —
Violations detected — —
Violations by code — —
False positives 0 —
False positive rate < 0.1% —
Legitimate workflows impacted 0 —
Paths most frequently flagged — —
Extensions most frequently flagged — —

Exit Criteria:

  • All metrics collected
  • False positive count = 0
  • All violations explainable
  • Violations correlate with real risk
  • Impact radius documented

Phase 4: Validation

Status: Law proven safe, no negative side effects
Blocking: No

Negative Side Effects Checklist:

Side Effect Status Evidence
Silent productivity loss ❌ None —
Governance deadlock ❌ None —
Law conflicts ❌ None —
Observability gap ❌ None —
Path canonicalization bugs ❌ None —
OS-specific edge cases ❌ None —
Task-class escalation ❌ None —
Extension bypass tricks ❌ None —

Exit Criteria:

  • All negative side effects checked
  • No unresolved false positives
  • Rollback path defined
  • Human approval obtained
  • DRACO board attestation

Phase 5: Constitutional Enforcement

Status: Law blocks violations
Blocking: Yes — tokens denied, requests blocked

Activation Requirements:

  • Phases 0–4 complete
  • Zero unresolved false positives
  • All violations explainable
  • Violations correlate with real risk
  • Impact radius understood
  • Rollback path defined
  • Human authorization obtained
  • CSR epoch assigned

Enforcement Behavior:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    REQUEST INCOMING                         │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                              │
                              ▼
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                 LAW VALIDATION (Active)                      │
│  - Validates against manifest                                │
│  - Generates violation code if invalid                       │
│  - BLOCKS execution if violation detected                   │
│  - Returns error with violation code                         │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                              │
                    ┌─────────┴─────────┐
                    │                   │
               VALID                  INVALID
                    │                   │
                    ▼                   ▼
            ┌───────────────┐   ┌───────────────────┐
            │ TOKEN ISSUED  │   │ REQUEST BLOCKED   │
            │ EXECUTION     │   │ VIOLATION LOGGED  │
            │ PROCEEDS      │   │ ESCALATION TRIGGER│
            └───────────────┘   └───────────────────┘

3. Law Hardening Checklist

Before any law graduates to Phase 5 (Constitutional Enforcement), it must pass this checklist:

3.1 Definition Completeness

  • Law text is unambiguous
  • All violation codes defined
  • All edge cases documented
  • Related laws identified and non-conflicting

3.2 Implementation Correctness

  • Validator logic implemented correctly
  • Unit tests pass with 100% coverage of violation codes
  • Integration tests pass with real workloads
  • No path canonicalization bugs
  • No OS-specific edge cases

3.3 Shadow Evaluation Results

  • Minimum 7 days of shadow evaluation
  • All violation types observed
  • False positive rate < 0.1%
  • No unexplained violations

3.4 Evidence Quality

  • Metrics collected and documented
  • Violations correlate with real risk
  • Impact radius understood
  • No legitimate workflows impacted

3.5 Negative Side Effects

  • No silent productivity loss
  • No governance deadlock
  • No law conflicts
  • No observability gap

3.6 Rollback Readiness

  • Rollback path defined
  • Rollback tested
  • Rollback does not cause data loss

3.7 Human Authorization

  • Human review completed
  • DRACO board attestation obtained
  • CSR epoch assigned

4. Current Law Status

Law Phase Blocking Status
CP1 — Tier Collision Prevention 5 Yes Enforced
CP2 — Execution Collision Prevention 5 Yes Enforced
CP3 — Amendment Collision Prevention 5 Yes Enforced
CP4 — Semantic Collision Prevention 5 Yes Enforced
CP5 — Build/Topology Collision Prevention 5 Yes Enforced
CP6 — Governance Collision Prevention 5 Yes Enforced
CP7 — Directory Boundary Enforcement 1 No Instrumentation

5. Graduation Criteria

A law graduates from Phase N to Phase N+1 when:

  1. All exit criteria for Phase N are met
  2. No unresolved issues from Phase N
  3. Human approval obtained (Phases 4→5)
  4. CSR epoch assigned (Phases 4→5)

6. Rollback Procedure

If a law in Phase 5 causes issues:

  1. Immediate: Revert to Phase 2 (Shadow Evaluation)
  2. Log: All violations during incident
  3. Analyze: Root cause of false positive or negative side effect
  4. Fix: Update law or implementation
  5. Re-validate: Complete Phases 2–4 again
  6. Re-approve: Human authorization for Phase 5

Governance Lineage

Field Value
Artifact ID RPAS‑CM‑LAW‑HARDENING‑001
Version v1.0.0
Parent RPAS‑CM‑COL‑001 v1.0.0 (CSR‑42)
Related RPAS‑CM‑AEV‑001, RPAS‑CM‑PRE‑001
Author Agent (advisory) — awaiting human decision
CSR Epoch Pending attestation