Skip to content

Harden Linux host assessment import contract - #306

Merged
sodejm merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
codex/issue-106-linux-review
Oct 15, 2026
Merged

sodejm merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
codex/issue-106-linux-review

Conversation

@sodejm

@sodejm sodejm commented Oct 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Hardens the offline Linux privilege-boundary assessment import for #106. Protection states are validated per control (including AppArmor complain mode), and oversized JSON integers return a contract error through both the API and CLI. The import contract, registered skill, architecture count, and specification now match the implemented capability.

This is an incremental offline importer change. A reported canary crossing is still evidence from an imported report, not a locally demonstrated privilege boundary crossing. Native disposable-host positive, negative, fixed, and cleanup evidence remains outstanding, so #106 should stay open.

Validation in this branch: 50 focused tests passed; python3 -m cops check host-assessment-workbench, adapter synchronization, capability audit, and make check passed. The pinned local push gate passed its full pytest coverage run, Ruff checks, and pip audit. No native Linux host run was performed.

Security review considered malformed and hostile report input, protection-state ambiguity, and unsupported capability claims. The parser rejects invalid states and returns bounded contract failures; no executable host action or authorization surface was added.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 15, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-15T01:01:04.385549Z 0ac41f8 New commits
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 53f58f7ff4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread specs/host-linux-privilege-boundaries.spec.md
Comment thread ARCHITECTURE.md Outdated
@sodejm
sodejm merged commit 23b0782 into main Oct 15, 2026
25 of 26 checks passed
@sodejm
sodejm deleted the codex/issue-106-linux-review branch October 18, 2026 15:11
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