The lean-build job proved the delete-a-plugin guarantee with two plugins and
four hand-picked marker components. It now builds a real twelve-plugin set, and
the assertions follow a rule instead of a hunch: one component from EVERY
omitted plugin must be absent, one from EVERY chosen plugin must be present, and
the backend tree is checked both ways. An omitted set that grows without its
check growing is how a leak ships.
CHANGELOG had not been touched across the whole range, so the largest
security-behaviour change in the product - per-PC endpoint credentials, the
shared-key refusal for enrolled PCs, server pinning, agent 1.20.1 and tray 1.7.1
- had no release record. An [Unreleased] section now carries it, written from
the commits rather than from memory.
CLAUDE.md and the agent quick-reference stated that ADR-016 bans storing
credentials in the registry. It does not, and this fleet depends on HKLM for its
collector key and server pins: the next person following that text removes them
and silently breaks reporting and pinning on every un-enrolled PC. Corrected,
along with two other statements that were false on this branch - the database is
MySQL, not PostgreSQL, and column names are lowercase concatenated, not
snake_case, which is the opposite of what the gate enforces.
The wiki drafts are updated against the code as it stands, each old finding
given a verdict with a file and line rather than left as an assertion from a
week ago, and a new page records the ADR conformance result - including that the
ADR set itself is not on this branch, so nothing here enforces it except the
naming and style script.
They are also scrubbed of the things that must not reach a published wiki: the
site name, the internal git server, developer home paths and the assistant
tooling. They now pass the repository's own publishability patterns, which is
what the scrub is for.
Two commits were made in the GitHub web editor to test whether the self-hosted
runner group was shared with this repository - it is. They branched from
e60945e, while the publication export produced its own two commits from the same
parent, so main here and main on GitHub had diverged and the ff-only push was
correctly refused.
Merging rather than force-pushing: the commits are real history somebody made,
and the wilm branch has already merged them, so discarding them from main would
only delay their return.
