JVM startup, not analysis, is what a push scan spends its time on: each disposable script invocation costs 13 to 23 seconds while the work takes under a second. The session owns one Joern server per transaction on loopback with an OS-chosen port and no published port. Three properties are load-bearing, and the probe that settled the design demonstrated why each is needed. An HTTP status is not an answer. The server returns success even for a compile error, with the diagnostic in its body, so every request redirects the evaluated code's console output into a fresh private file behind a nonce, and the nonce is verified before the answer is accepted. The engine's body is retained for exactly the case where the receipt is missing, without which that failure explains nothing. A poisoned session answers nothing afterwards, and cancellation kills the process group rather than the launcher, which this project has already run a machine out of memory by neglecting. What the probe established about the engine, after three iterations that each failed loudly: runScript is absent from the server REPL; a shipped @main script cannot be nested in a block expression, so definitions go to the top level unwrapped; and the REPL shadows Console with io.joern.console.Console, which has no withOut, so capture must qualify scala.Console. With that fixed, both mechanisms answer identically to the disposable invocation, 0.8 s against 9.8 s. The backend routes batch and single queries through the session only when session_transport is enabled, which it is not by default. Any failure falls back to the disposable invocation rather than reporting a zero, and each script is defined under its own name because every script declares exec. Equivalence for taint, dominance and configuration is task 11.2 and gates any measured run. 1,391 tests passed, nine skipped. Rollout stays NO-GO. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EmM1j46qgKMh3zqD1QMwEo
19 KiB
M1a evidence: the NodeGoat detection with every veto recorded
Run date 2026-09-16. Milestone M1a of release-milestones.md.
Instrument benchmarks/push/m1a_record_vetoes.py; flag --experimental-record-vetoes.
Evidence: summary
and its 11-file bundle.
This record diagnoses. It admits no defect, enables no capability, qualifies no language and
makes no latency claim. All three artifacts report finding_status: none with zero admitted
defects; every recorded section carries its experimental label.
What was declared before running
Expected base/head pins, expected operation and expected outcome for all three comparisons
were written to m1a-record.json before the first scan. The declared target is
app/routes/contributions.js, handleContributionsUpdate, family injection, lines 32–34.
| Case | Base | Head | Declared expectation |
|---|---|---|---|
| nodegoat-introduce | fixed 0b453d5a |
vulnerable c5cb68a7 |
raw finding at the three eval lines, recorded novelty new |
| nodegoat-repair | vulnerable c5cb68a7 |
fixed 0b453d5a |
fixed twin analyzed and quiet; three base-only findings |
| nodegoat-benign | vulnerable c5cb68a7 |
benign f772c59e |
backlog unchanged; never new or worsened |
Each revision's target file was reopened before the run: 2,485, 2,491 and 2,498 bytes with recorded SHA-256 digests. Each head scan reported a complete 44-file JavaScript census. Installed engine, facts, query, policy, core and semantics provenance matched the frozen values in all three artifacts.
Observed outcome
| Case | Elapsed | Target findings | Target question answered | Deadline reached |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| nodegoat-introduce | 349.8 s | 3 | yes, 9 rows | no |
| nodegoat-repair | 153.8 s | 0 | yes, 0 rows | no |
| nodegoat-benign | 261.4 s | 3 | yes | no |
All three ran under an explicitly named 900-second development budget. These durations are development measurements and cannot satisfy or measure the 30-second hook latency gate.
Verdict recorded by the instrument: raw witness present, fixed twin quiet, unchanged revision not reported as a new regression, recorded evaluation produced for all three. The milestone's kill criterion did not trigger: the fixed twin was genuinely analyzed, answering its target question with zero rows and no deadline reason, while the same three findings appear on its base side as base-only findings. Silence from failure was not accepted as a pass.
The vetoes that actually fired
Identical for each of the three eval witnesses on the vulnerable revision. Five recognized
vetoes fired and were recorded rather than applied:
| Stage | Veto | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| head question | change_context_incomplete |
the answered target question carried 9 rows and was then demoted |
| head scan | dynamic_external_or_depth_context_unresolved |
on the target's own question identity, not an unrelated one |
| head scan | vendor_semantics_unresolved |
recorded both as a degradation and as a scope boundary |
| base scan | graph_incomplete |
the base question answered with 0 rows and was then demoted |
| change context | ambiguous_line_correspondence |
file-level, on the target file |
The earlier owner diagnosis named four independent vetoes and expected query-to-operation provenance and question-owned vendor relevance to be the two that mattered. Both fired. The run also confirms the third and fourth, so all four named vetoes are real on this case.
What M1a corrected in the diagnosis
A fifth veto is the actual remaining blocker. With all five recognized vetoes lifted, the
detection does not become new. Its reason advances from witness_identity_unresolved to
operation_correspondence_unresolved, because the head operation sits on a changed line and
therefore has no base line anchor. The comparison can classify an operation only when it maps
to a base location.
The unchanged revision proves this is the mechanism rather than a coincidence. Its comment-only
edit leaves lines 32–34 unchanged, the base location resolves to the same lines, and the
recorded novelty becomes unchanged / same_supported_mechanism. Same evidence, same policy,
opposite correspondence outcome:
| Revision | Operation line | Base location | Recorded novelty |
|---|---|---|---|
| vulnerable | changed | unresolved | unknown, operation_correspondence_unresolved |
| unchanged | unchanged | resolved to the same line | unchanged, same_supported_mechanism |
Query identity differs from witness identity, as predicted. The target is selected through a
file-fallback question with function=None, while the rows report method <lambda>2 at lines
32–34. The declared benchmark function is handleContributionsUpdate. This is recorded, not
applied: it is why production reported witness_identity_unresolved before any lifting, since
an unresolved question yields no comparable operation at all.
Admission reasons that no flag can remove. capability_unavailable remains on every
candidate because the registry is empty and this flag cannot enable a capability.
dependency_unresolved remains because unlifted coverage reasons still reach admission.
What M1b must repair, ordered by this evidence
- Authentic per-family change context.
change_context_incompletedemoted every answered question in all three cases. Dominance and configuration questions need their own context producers describing their actual query scope; taint context must not be copied into them. - Question-owned vendor relevance.
vendor_semantics_unresolvedturned an otherwise complete 44-file first-party census intograph_incompleteon every base question. Keep the exclusion physical; establish which question actually requires excluded semantics. - Operation correspondence for changed lines. The blocker M1a surfaced. Bind the required base/head correspondence to the specific operation rather than to a line anchor, with absent, renamed, removed-guard and ambiguous-operation controls. Do not delete the ambiguity check and do not treat lexical alignment as semantic proof.
- Correspondence ambiguity scoped to its file region.
ambiguous_line_correspondenceis recorded file-wide and inherited by every question, including uniquely mapped operations. - Query-to-operation provenance. Carry verified provenance from the selected question to the reported operation. Do not inject benchmark function names into regions.
Vetoes that did not fire on this case stay as they are and their families stay experimental.
Limits
Three comparisons on one inspected teaching repository. NodeGoat is development and transfer data; it cannot qualify production Node support, and Node evidence cannot qualify PHP or Python. The lifted view is a diagnostic reconstruction, not a comparison result: it shows what the existing evidence would support if those vetoes were repaired, and no repair has been made. Runtime, independent qualification and rollout all remain NO-GO.
M1b step 1: what the first three repairs changed
Rerun 2026-09-16 after tasks 10.1–10.3, same instrument, same pins, same budget. Evidence: summary and its bundle.
The recorded view now classifies the case correctly. The vulnerable revision reaches
new / operation_absent_from_comparable_base, and the unchanged revision reaches
unchanged / same_supported_mechanism with its base location resolved to the same lines.
Before the repairs both stopped at operation_correspondence_unresolved and
witness_identity_unresolved.
| Revision | Before 10.1–10.3 | After 10.1–10.3 |
|---|---|---|
| vulnerable | unknown, operation_correspondence_unresolved |
new, operation_absent_from_comparable_base |
| unchanged | unknown, witness_identity_unresolved |
unchanged, same_supported_mechanism |
The rerun also caught a defect in the repair itself: the new novelty reason was missing from
the admission allowlist, so admission rejected the candidate as change_unsupported. Fixed
with a control.
The production path is unchanged so far, because two vetoes still demote the target
questions: change_context_incomplete on the head from the question's own
dynamic_external_or_depth_context_unresolved, and graph_incomplete on the base from the
vendor exclusion.
Why the last two vetoes need new query evidence
Neither remaining veto can be scoped or relaxed soundly as the plan originally described, and the rerun is what showed it.
A taint answer reports traced flows. An absent row therefore means either that the operation
does not exist in the base, or that it exists and no traced flow reached it.
dynamic_external_or_depth_context_unresolved exists precisely to stop the second being read
as the first. Removing or narrowing it would let an unreached operation look absent, which
turns a wrong absence into a wrong new finding: the false-positive direction this project
cannot afford.
At the same time the flag carries no discrimination. It is computed over every in-scope method, and on any real Express application ordinary framework and dependency calls have unresolved destinations, so it is always true and can never be discharged. A veto that is always on and can never be lifted is why the tool reports nothing on real projects.
The resolution is neither to keep it nor to drop it, but to supply the evidence that makes absence provable independently of reachability: export the operations the query actually enumerated in the question's scope, separately from the flows it traced. Absence is then established from the inventory, while a traced-flow claim still requires complete reachability. Vendor exclusion can then stop acting as a global completion veto for the same reason, since dependency on excluded code becomes visible in the evidence rather than assumed.
That prerequisite is now task 10.4, ahead of the two vetoes it unblocks. It adds no detector, alias resolver or second source IR.
M1b outcome: the same case through the production rules
Rerun 2026-09-16 after tasks 10.1 to 10.6, same instrument, same pins, same budget. Evidence: summary and its bundle.
The production comparison now classifies all three revisions without any lifting, and its verdicts match the recorded view exactly. That match is the point: the vetoes M1a recorded were repaired rather than bypassed.
| Revision | Production verdict | Recorded verdict |
|---|---|---|
| vulnerable | new, operation_absent_from_comparable_base |
identical |
| fixed twin | quiet, analyzed, three base-only findings | identical |
| unchanged | unchanged, same_supported_mechanism |
identical |
Compared with M1a, where production reported witness_identity_unresolved on every finding
and every one of the 436 questions was demoted on both sides.
The head target questions now complete, the base scan completes all 436 questions, and the
three eval witnesses at contributions.js lines 32 to 34 are attributed to the change that
introduced them. Timings were 325.7 s, 158.9 s and 260.3 s under the named 900-second
development budget, which measures nothing about the hook gate.
All three artifacts still report finding_status: none with zero admitted defects. Admission
rejects on capability_unavailable, which is the deliberate eligibility gate, and on
dependency_unresolved, which is a coarse plumbing defect recorded as its own task: the runner
passes every coverage reason as every candidate's dependency gaps rather than the gaps that
pertain to that candidate. Neither is a comparison failure.
What each repair contributed, measured
- 10.1 operation correspondence. Moved the vulnerable revision from
operation_correspondence_unresolvedto a classifiable operation. - 10.2 required comparison scope. Stopped unrelated unsupported families from blocking a complete target comparison.
- 10.3 ambiguity scoping. Stopped one file's repeated unchanged lines invalidating every question in the repository.
- 10.4 operation inventory. Made absence provable from enumeration rather than from the absence of a traced flow, which is what let 10.5 and 10.6 be done soundly.
- 10.5 reachability binding. Let the head questions complete, since bounded reachability cannot invalidate a flow that was traced.
- 10.6 declared exclusion. Let the base scan's 436 answers stand, since excluding dependencies is a scope choice rather than a failed read.
A seventh change was needed after the first rerun: the same exclusion and ambiguity distinction
was still missing inside the comparison's own degradation and boundary checks, so the verdict
stayed at head_context_incomplete even once both scans completed. The rerun is what surfaced
it, not the unit suite.
Limits
Three comparisons on one inspected teaching repository, under a development budget. NodeGoat is development and transfer data: it cannot qualify production Node support, and Node evidence cannot qualify PHP or Python. No capability is enabled, no defect is admitted, no alert is emitted, and no latency claim is made. Runtime, independent qualification and rollout all remain NO-GO.
M1b exit run (tasks 10.1 to 10.8)
Rerun 2026-09-16 after every repair, same instrument, same pins, same 900-second development budget. Evidence: summary and its bundle.
| Revision | Verdict | Admission | Elapsed |
|---|---|---|---|
| vulnerable | all three sites new, operation_absent_from_comparable_base |
capability_unavailable only |
326.4 s |
| fixed twin | analyzed and quiet, three base-only findings | none to admit | 157.8 s |
| unchanged | all three sites unchanged, same_supported_mechanism |
capability_unavailable, unchanged |
256.8 s |
The vulnerable revision's only remaining admission reason is the deliberate eligibility gate.
dependency_unresolved is gone, which verifies task 10.7 on real data: those gaps belonged to
unrelated questions.
Each finding now carries its provenance explicitly: question function None, engine method
<lambda>2, witness eval(req.body.preTax) -> const preTax = eval(req.body.preTax) at
contributions.js line 32, and likewise for lines 33 and 34. The unchanged revision resolves each
base location to the same line, which is why it reads unchanged rather than new.
Source receipts were reopened before the run, and the head census is the complete 44 files.
Which vetoes were repaired and which remain
All five vetoes M1a recorded are repaired, plus two the repairs exposed:
| Veto | State |
|---|---|
change_context_incomplete on the target question |
repaired, question completes |
graph_incomplete on the base from vendor exclusion |
repaired, all 436 base questions complete |
ambiguous_line_correspondence inherited repository-wide |
repaired, decided per operation |
dynamic_external_or_depth_context_unresolved as a blanket veto |
repaired, bound to reachability claims |
operation_correspondence_unresolved on a changed line |
repaired via the enumerated inventory |
| comparison's own degradation and boundary checks | repaired after the first rerun exposed them |
dependency_unresolved on every candidate |
repaired, gaps attributed per candidate |
What remains, recorded rather than repaired, because each is outside this case or a later milestone:
- 231 of 436 head questions still report
change_context_incomplete, fromcontext_projection_unavailableandcontext_scope_emptyon families whose queries export no context. Those are dominance and configuration questions. They did not block this case and their families stay experimental, so per the milestone they stay as they are. - The vendor exclusion and the file's correspondence ambiguity remain reported in coverage. That is intended: they are recorded limits, not repaired absences.
What M1b has not yet demonstrated
The milestone also asks for a developer-readable evaluation finding carrying a supported security consequence and a concrete repair direction. Those two come from an evaluated capability declaration, and the registry is deliberately empty, so nothing renders them today. Writing that text without a declaration is precisely what admission exists to prevent, so it is not something to work around here. The comparison half of M1b is verified; the explanation half waits on a declaration, which is M4's subject.
Limits
Three comparisons on one inspected teaching repository under a development budget. NodeGoat is development and transfer data: it cannot qualify production Node support, and Node evidence cannot qualify PHP or Python. No capability is enabled, no defect is admitted, no alert is emitted and no latency claim is made. Runtime, independent qualification and rollout all remain NO-GO.
M1b explanation: the finding as a developer would read it
Run 2026-09-16 after task 10.10, same pins and budget, with an unreviewed experimental declaration generated by the instrument and bound to the run's own analysis semantics. Evidence: summary and its bundle.
Three evaluation findings were rendered on the vulnerable revision, one per eval site. For line 32:
- Location app/routes/contributions.js:32, family injection, novelty new with
operation_absent_from_comparable_base. - Witness
eval(req.body.preTax) -> const preTax = eval(req.body.preTax). - Change attribution
base:app/routes/contributions.js:32-34. - Provenance
file_scope: the question named no function, the engine reported<lambda>2. - Consequence "A request field reaches const preTax = eval(req.body.preTax), where it is evaluated as JavaScript, so an attacker controlling that field can execute arbitrary code in the server process."
- Repair "Replace the evaluation at const preTax = eval(req.body.preTax) with a numeric conversion such as Number(...) or parseInt(...), then validate the result before use."
Both sentences come from the declaration's templates through the grounded-template path, not from
generated prose. The declaration reports verdict experimental and enabled: false, the
production result still reports finding_status: none, and all three artifacts carry zero
admitted defects. The rendering path never reaches admission, so no supplied declaration can
change that.
A defect this surfaced, recorded not repaired
The operation symbol admission extracts is the text before the first parenthesis, which for
const preTax = eval(req.body.preTax) is const preTax = eval, not eval. The demonstration
declaration had to enumerate each assignment spelling for its coverage check to pass. A real
qualified declaration cannot enumerate every assignment a codebase might write, so admission
would reject genuine findings on operation_semantics_mismatch. That is recorded as its own task
ahead of M4; it is not worked around here.
M1b is met: the comparison classifies all three revisions through the production rules, and the finding reads as a developer would need it to, with every claim traceable to its evidence.