Commit Graph
2 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 fe45081b43 fix(ci): run ruff format, and record run 5 at 90% pair-correct
CI was red on `ruff format --check`: 23 files. I ran `ruff check` after every
change this session and never once ran `ruff format --check`, though CI runs
both. Lint passing is not formatting passing, and I treated one as evidence for
the other for the whole session.

Formatting applied. The full CI sequence now reproduces locally: format, lint,
mypy over 94 files, 735 tests, three gates byte-identical, compileall, and the
semantic job's 16 marked tests.

Also records run 5 of the pipeline measurement, which the vampi fix lifted as
predicted:

                       hunter (K=5)   pipeline (K=1)
  pair-correct              76.7%          90.0%
  leak                      12.3%           6.7%
  detection                    --          96.7%
  cost                     ~$0.69        $0.0068

27 of 30 pairs. Five runs, each step from a measurement contradicting an
assumption: 73.3 (no pipeline path) -> 73.3 (routing fixed, IDENTICAL, which
exposed the discarded verdict) -> 80.0 (residual question matched to its
arbiter) -> 86.7 (aiohttp settings) -> 90.0 (dominance question no longer
contradicting its own evidence).

One miss left: dsvpwa-dsvpwa-main, whose setting is an argparse --ssl default
rather than a security-setting call. Out of reach before the settings work and
still is; contorting the arbiter around one pair would be worse than the miss.

The caveat is recorded beside the number: 30 pairs of one slice, and the slice
iterated against all session. The +16% overfitting gap against vfc-js is why
contributor-scan Req 8.1/8.2 exist.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-08 19:46:58 +02:00
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 fec67253f3 feat(model-grounded-detection): 4.1 guard dominance, 4.2 the missing sink facts
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
2026-09-08 14:45:12 +02:00