Skip to content

[Commercialization Gap] Productionize tenancy, durability, observability, release, and support #174

Description

@seonghobae

Buyer problem

TEPP has strong repository-level contracts and partial PostgreSQL/API/security slices, but it is not yet an operable multi-tenant product. Buyers cannot install a supported release, authenticate users/services, run durable jobs, monitor SLOs, recover from failures, upgrade safely, or obtain a complete procurement/assurance evidence pack.

Product outcome

Turn the scientifically validated product vertical into a production service that can run standalone and as a modular CWL service. The service must preserve TEPP's purpose-bound PII utility without blanket masking and must remain honest about CSAP/SOC 2 readiness versus certification.

Required capabilities

Deployment and runtime

  • versioned public API/CLI and generated clients;
  • durable analysis queue, status lifecycle, cancellation, retry, dead-letter and idempotency;
  • PostgreSQL reference store plus object storage for immutable source/model/export artifacts;
  • Compose deployment first, with Kubernetes-ready probes/configuration and no hidden monolithic assumptions;
  • production TLS and authenticated service boundaries;
  • bounded resource/capacity controls and backpressure.

Identity, tenancy, and privacy

  • Keyverse-compatible OIDC/OAuth/JWT and service identity adapter;
  • tenant isolation through PostgreSQL RLS or equivalent mandatory enforcement;
  • purpose-, role-, lifetime-, and field-bound access;
  • protected re-identification/identity-mapping path without disabling legitimate PII-dependent work;
  • retention, legal hold, export, deletion, backup, and restore controls with evidence.

Operability and assurance

  • OpenTelemetry traces/metrics/logs without source-text or credential leakage;
  • SLOs for submission, queue latency, run completion, artifact retrieval, error rate, and recovery;
  • runbooks for provider outage, database/object-store outage, corrupted artifact, model regression, GPU loss, queue backlog, security incident, and rollback;
  • capacity/load/soak/failover tests and measured hot-partition mitigation;
  • immutable audit/provenance, SBOM, dependency/license evidence, signed build provenance, reproducible release artifacts, and vulnerability-response process;
  • backup/restore, point-in-time recovery, migration upgrade/downgrade rehearsal, and disaster-recovery evidence.

Acceptance criteria

  • A clean environment can install and run a versioned release from documented Compose commands without repository-internal credentials.
  • Liveness, readiness, startup, and dependency health are separate and fail with content-redacting responses.
  • Durable jobs survive worker/API restarts; duplicate submission and retry produce no duplicate chargeable/scientific artifacts.
  • Cross-tenant reads/writes, forged tenant headers, invalid JWT audience/signature, stale grants, and purpose escalation fail closed.
  • External consumers use versioned APIs/events only; no CWL product reads TEPP application tables directly.
  • OpenTelemetry spans connect request → queue → compute → validation → artifact → result without copying source text, identity mapping, provider keys, or unrestricted model output.
  • Capacity tests cover realistic corpus sizes and concurrent tenants; queue depth, CPU/GPU/RAM/VRAM, database/object-store, and backpressure limits are documented.
  • Backup/restore and corrupted-manifest rehearsals prove restored artifacts are unusable until integrity, tenant, cutoff, and provenance checks pass.
  • Every release has version/CHANGELOG consistency, signed tag/artifacts, SPDX or CycloneDX SBOM, build provenance, checksums, migration manifest, rollback steps, and exact protected-head evidence.
  • Security/threat-model tests cover SSRF, request smuggling/framing, hostile Unicode/JSON/archive, prompt injection, dependency compromise, log/export leakage, privilege escalation, and denial-of-service bounds.
  • CSAP/SOC 2/ISO/NIST mappings identify control owner, implementation, runtime evidence, test, known limitation, and deployment/customer responsibility; no certification or attestation is claimed without independent evidence.
  • Support policy defines compatibility, upgrade window, deprecation, incident severity, response/communication, data portability, and vulnerability disclosure.
  • A release candidate executes the end-to-end product issue with exact-head CI/security/scientific evidence and no unresolved release blocker.

Commercial proof

Prepare a buyer-facing but source-backed package containing architecture, data flow, threat model, deployment sizing, SLOs, security/privacy controls, validation evidence, limitations, pricing/meter hooks, migration/rollback, and an anonymized reproducible demo. Every claim must link to protected-main or released evidence.

Scope boundary

This issue does not ask the repository to self-certify CSAP/SOC 2, store payment-card data, silently mask all PII, or weaken scientific gates for availability. A failed scientific-integrity gate is an operational failure, not a warning to hide.

Authority

Use OPERABILITY, COMPLIANCE_READINESS, SECURITY, THREAT_MODEL, ADR 0011/0013/0014, and the latest authoritative standards recorded in the repository doctoring register.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions