docs(roadmap): pin external-validation note — gateway is 1:1 prior ar… - #78
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…t for proposed GitHub wiki-API anti-abuse design
While drafting a community/community feature request asking for a REST +
GraphQL surface to create/seed repository wikis (re-file of #196186),
the proposal's "anti-abuse considerations" section names five mechanisms
that should be baked into any new write-API for an agent-collaborative
world. Internal audit confirmed http-capability-gateway already
implements a 1:1 mapping of every one of them in shipping code:
* Per-author rate limits → RateLimiter (token-bucket per {client_ip,
trust_level})
* Token scope gating → SafeTrust capability lattice (formally verified
in Idris2)
* Human-attestation header → A2ML tamper-evident JSON envelopes
* Audit metadata surface → VeriSimDB durable append-only trail
* Org-level opt-in → YAML Verb Governance Spec compiled to ETS
* Per-page review queue → K9-SVC SLA + breach policies
* Bonus beyond proposal: mTLS client cert → X.509 OU → capability;
stealth mode; policy versioning; atom-exhaustion DoS defence
Adds a new "External validation" section to ROADMAP.adoc capturing the
mapping in table form. Explicitly NOT a commitment to externalise the
gateway as a GitHub-API drop-in — MVP scope per the sections above is
unchanged. The note is a reference anchor for two reasons:
1. If a Hubber engages on the discussion thread asking "do you have
prior art?" — the gateway is the answer, documented in advance.
2. Confidence anchor for the narrow MVP — knowing the design maps
cleanly onto an externally-recognised problem strengthens the
argument that the narrow scope is on the right axis.
Snapshot pinned at 2026-05-28; future divergence between the
discussion thread and the gateway scope is documented at the point it
arises, not here.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…t for proposed GitHub wiki-API anti-abuse design
While drafting a community/community feature request asking for a REST + GraphQL surface to create/seed repository wikis (re-file of #196186), the proposal's "anti-abuse considerations" section names five mechanisms that should be baked into any new write-API for an agent-collaborative world. Internal audit confirmed http-capability-gateway already implements a 1:1 mapping of every one of them in shipping code:
Adds a new "External validation" section to ROADMAP.adoc capturing the mapping in table form. Explicitly NOT a commitment to externalise the gateway as a GitHub-API drop-in — MVP scope per the sections above is unchanged. The note is a reference anchor for two reasons:
If a Hubber engages on the discussion thread asking "do you have prior art?" — the gateway is the answer, documented in advance.
Confidence anchor for the narrow MVP — knowing the design maps cleanly onto an externally-recognised problem strengthens the argument that the narrow scope is on the right axis.
Snapshot pinned at 2026-05-28; future divergence between the discussion thread and the gateway scope is documented at the point it arises, not here.
Summary
Closes #
Type of change
How has this been verified?
Checklist
git commit -S).SPDX-License-Identifier(code/configMPL-2.0,prose
CC-BY-SA-4.0); I did not relicense existing files.Notes for reviewers