JVM startup dominated a scan: a call per region per family put a ten-line
file at 275s over three regions, and would have put a thousand regions at
roughly fifty hours. The queries themselves are milliseconds once the CPG
is loaded, so the cost was almost entirely process starts.
scan_repository() is now collect -> batch -> arbitrate. The three .sc
scripts accept a `requests` JSON map and answer all of them in one run,
keeping the single-request form so the committed measurements stay
reproducible byte-for-byte. Arbiters are untouched: each is handed a
CpgResult whose `run` returns its own prefetched rows.
The batcher builds parameters by calling request_params() extracted from
taint.py, dominance.py and config_value.py rather than reconstructing
them. A second copy that drifts from the arbiter's is the exact shape of
the five family-assumption bugs the predecessor spec spent a session
finding; there is now one definition per family and the batcher borrows
it.
Regions are also deduplicated by (path, function), collapsing the
nameless entry-point rows that were producing `model:injection:?:10`.
Measured on the same ten-line file: 275s -> 106s, three duplicate
findings -> one `model:injection:ping:10`, rung unchanged at
model_entailed. Gates byte-identical.
Server mode is recorded as task 2.3, deliberately sequenced after the
repository measurement: whether the remaining ~100s floor is worth a
process model, a weakened subprocess seam and a Scala-evaluating HTTP
endpoint depends on a build-time-to-query-time ratio only 2.2 produces.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
4.1 is the arbiter for the class no crash oracle reaches. An access-control bug
is the ABSENCE of a guard: no flow to follow, no crash to reproduce. What the
model can establish is a consistency violation -- an obligated operation no
discharging guard governs, in a file where its siblings are governed by one.
"Governed" turned out not to be one relation, and asking pure CFG dominance of
the operation gets two of three shapes wrong. Measured against the real engine:
identity constraint the guard is INSIDE the operation's arguments
filter_by(owner_id = current_user.id)
identity branch abort(403).controlledBy == [note.owner_id != current_user.id]
-- the check runs AFTER the fetch, so it never dominates
the operation, but it controls whether the value escapes
dominating guard a discharger-naming call that dominates the operation
That is why the query uses controlledBy rather than dominatedBy for shape 2.
Two bugs found by running it, both the same class as the sanitizer bug in group
2 -- part of a fact flattened, the part carrying the signal dropped:
* dominance_specs used only `calls` and `decorators`, omitting
identity_sources (current_user, request.user) and constraint_params
(owner_id, user_id) -- which is how an identity constraint is actually
written. The arbiter reported "no guard" on handlers that plainly had one.
request_sources and permissive_values stay excluded: they describe the
vulnerable shape, and including them would let the arbiter read a bug as
its own fix.
* matching operations by code containment yielded four or five desugared rows
per operation (the bare `tmp1.filter_by` receiver among them, carrying none
of the guards the real call has), so a guarded operation could be flagged.
Matching is by call name now.
Live, deterministic, zero model calls:
leaky -> model_entailed no discharging guard, while 2 sibling handlers are guarded
edit_note -> no finding (ownership check controls the denial)
list_notes -> no finding (identity constraint in the query)
4.2 authors the sink facts the go/no-go measured as its largest miss class (11
of 23): Django ORM raw SQL, and the four families that previously had no fact
routing to them by CWE at all -- path, output_encoding, untrusted_destination,
prototype. Each entry is a documented dangerous API of the named library with
its provenance recorded inline, and rule_ids left empty because a sink fact is
not a detection rule. Flagged for maintainer review as data, given the standing
"no LLM-authored patterns" constraint. The exact-set assertion written in task
1.1 to hold this gap open is updated rather than deleted, so it still fails if a
family ever loses its seed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
