Skip to content

Plan: record the Requisition answers in slices 024 and 026 - #16

Merged
HackTuah merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
plan/answers-2026-09-20
Sep 20, 2026
Merged

HackTuah merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
plan/answers-2026-09-20

Conversation

@HackTuah

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

026's blocker lifted with the answer recorded as its lift condition; 024 records the FIPS verification limit.

…nnot verify Ed25519 history

The external authority plane's coding agent answered on 2026-09-20: a
queued-then-acknowledged receipt path does not change their side as long as
the signed envelope passes through unmodified, and a reconciliation row on
their side is available on request. 026's NOTES.md records the answer as
its lift condition; the SLICE.md says it now waits only on 024.

The same answer confirms that OTP's notsup in FIPS mode covers verification
of EdDSA, so a FIPS build cannot verify an Ed25519 chain written earlier.
024's risks now say the standalone verifier runs on a stock OTP as well and
reports that case as a named outcome, never as invalid. plan_check: PASS.

Signed-off-by: Ayla Croft <aylacroft@proton.me>
…t wording

The gate's name check (run 35508645049) found a platform name in
slices/026-store-and-forward-receipts/NOTES.md line 6, outside the one
README section where it is permitted. Reworded. trinity.names: OK.
plan_check: PASS.

Signed-off-by: Ayla Croft <aylacroft@proton.me>
@HackTuah
HackTuah merged commit 7514a7b into main Sep 20, 2026
2 checks passed
@HackTuah
HackTuah deleted the plan/answers-2026-09-20 branch September 20, 2026 11:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant