Skip to content

docs(security): subsume Black Hat HDT signals into governed containment plan#22295

Closed
BrianCLong wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
codex/address-current-issues
Closed

docs(security): subsume Black Hat HDT signals into governed containment plan#22295
BrianCLong wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
codex/address-current-issues

Conversation

@BrianCLong
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Motivation

  • Translate Black Hat 2025 signals about AI-companion persuasion, human-digital-twin (HDT) profiling, and model-aided social engineering into an actionable, testable containment plan.
  • Provide enforceable gates and a sprinted execution path so platform releases are constrained until controls are implemented.

Description

  • Add docs/security/HUMAN_DIGITAL_TWIN_RISK_CONTAINMENT_PLAN.md that defines MAESTRO-aligned threat modeling, immediate control package (policy/prompt guardrails, HDT abuse detection, metadata minimization, operator safety, red-team requirements), an N+1–N+3 execution plan, and explicit release gates and rollback/accountability rules.
  • Defines measurable success criteria (safety/detection/governance/operational gates) and requires feature-flag rollback paths and decision-log entries for any classifier or policy rule.

{
"decision_rationale": "Move from narrative concern to enforceable controls and align with existing MAESTRO/governance frameworks.",
"confidence_score": 0.89,
"rollback_plan": "Documentation-only change; revert file if superseded; classifiers/policy rules must include feature-flag rollback paths.",
"post_deploy_accountability_window": "14 days",
"tradeoffs": "Increases upfront implementation overhead to gain safety and compliance assurance."
}

Testing

  • Ran formatting check with pnpm exec prettier --check docs/security/HUMAN_DIGITAL_TWIN_RISK_CONTAINMENT_PLAN.md, which passed.
  • No code changes introduced; no unit/integration tests required for this documentation addition.

Codex Task

@BrianCLong BrianCLong added the codex Codex-owned implementation work label Mar 31, 2026 — with ChatGPT Codex Connector
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 31, 2026

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@BrianCLong has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 29 minutes and 31 seconds before requesting another review.

Your organization is not enrolled in usage-based pricing. Contact your admin to enable usage-based pricing to continue reviews beyond the rate limit, or try again in 29 minutes and 31 seconds.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: c01519f6-c546-4f0f-bc49-35562f6a8bbf

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 12cad4a and dd7fa59.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • docs/security/HUMAN_DIGITAL_TWIN_RISK_CONTAINMENT_PLAN.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch codex/address-current-issues

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request introduces a comprehensive Human Digital Twin Risk Containment Plan to address emerging threats from AI-companion persuasion and synthetic social influence. The plan details specific control packages, including policy guardrails, abuse detection classifiers, and metadata minimization, alongside a multi-sprint execution strategy. Review feedback focused on improving the precision of release gates by adding a precision floor to the detection metrics and clarifying the enforcement of identity ambiguity controls through specific policy references.

## Release Gates and Success Metrics

- **Safety Gate**: 100% of high-risk prompt classes covered by enforceable policy checks.
- **Detection Gate**: HDT abuse classifier recall >= 0.90 on red-team benchmark.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

security-medium medium

The Detection Gate currently only specifies a recall target, which is inconsistent with the requirement in line 69 to gate on both precision and recall floors. Without a precision floor, the system could generate a high volume of false positives, potentially violating the Operational Gate (line 88) by overwhelming the response team with low-fidelity alerts.

Suggested change
- **Detection Gate**: HDT abuse classifier recall >= 0.90 on red-team benchmark.
- **Detection Gate**: HDT abuse classifier recall >= 0.90 and precision >= 0.80 on red-team benchmark.


- Require confidence-bounded output for socio-political narratives.
- Add "counterfactual challenge" generation for any recommendation affecting public trust domains.
- Block autonomous outbound actions when identity ambiguity is above policy threshold.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

security-medium medium

The term "identity ambiguity" is not clearly defined. To make this control enforceable and testable, it is recommended to specify the metric being used (e.g., a confidence score) and reference the specific policy or registry where the acceptable thresholds are defined.

Suggested change
- Block autonomous outbound actions when identity ambiguity is above policy threshold.
- Block autonomous outbound actions when identity ambiguity score exceeds the threshold defined in the Identity Governance Policy.

@github-actions github-actions bot enabled auto-merge (squash) March 31, 2026 16:32
BrianCLong added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 31, 2026
## Summary

Rebuilds the golden-main merge train from a clean `main` base and
converges the currently mergeable PR set into one replacement branch.

This branch absorbs:
- #22296
- #22279
- #22281
- #22282
- #22283
- #22284
- #22285
- #22295
- #22297
- #22286
- #22291
- #22280
- #22277
- unique non-conflicting surfaces from #22241
- the admissibility/CACert/failure-demo runtime lane from #22314

This branch supersedes:
- #22298 as the contaminated/conflicting convergence branch
- #22277 as a standalone merge vehicle
- #22241 as the broad mixed-purpose convergence vehicle once remaining
review is complete
- #22314 as the standalone admissibility lane now folded into the golden
path

This branch intentionally excludes:
- #22292 because it targets `merge-surge/staging`, not `main`

## Conflict policy used while absorbing #22241

When merging `#22241` on top of the cleaned train, the following files
conflicted and were resolved in favor of the current train versions so
the newer focused CI/governance repairs remain authoritative:
- `.github/ci/required-checks.json`
- `.github/workflows/drift-sentinel.yml`
- `.github/workflows/pr-gate.yml`
- `docs/ci/REQUIRED_CHECKS_POLICY.yml`
- `pnpm-lock.yaml`
- `scripts/ci/check_branch_protection_drift.mjs`
- `scripts/ci/validate_workflows.mjs`

All other `#22241` changes merged on top of the train.

## Mapping Change Summary

This convergence branch updates workflow, schema, and governance
contracts that control merge eligibility, admissibility evidence, and
deterministic trust artifacts.

## Diff

- Added admissibility/evidence/CACert surfaces including
`packages/evidence/schemas/decision_trace.schema.json`
- Tightened golden-lane workflow policy and drift handling in
`.github/workflows/_policy-enforcer.yml`,
`.github/workflows/execution-graph-reconciliation.yml`,
`.github/workflows/post-ga-hardening-enforcement.yml`,
`.github/workflows/merge-surge.yml`,
`.github/workflows/control-plane-drift.yml`
- Realigned governance state in `governance/pilot-ci-policy.json` and
`governance/branch-protection.json`
- Repaired deterministic reconciliation verification in
`scripts/ci/verify_execution_graph_reconciliation.mjs` and
`scripts/ci/drift-sentinel.mjs`

## Justification

The repo needed one mergeable replacement lane that restores
deterministic governance checks, folds the admissibility implementation
into the golden path, and suppresses broken optional PR workflows that
were blocking convergence without being canonical required checks.

## Impact

- Canonical pilot checks remain `pr-gate / gate` and `drift-sentinel /
enforce`
- Merge-train branches no longer fail ordinary small-PR enforcement
gates by construction
- Optional broken workflows are narrowed to their owned surfaces so they
stop contaminating this convergence lane and the immediate post-merge
main push
- Execution-graph reconciliation now accepts the repo’s canonical
snake_case trust bundle fields

## Rollback Plan

Revert commit `ce32b96c0f` from
`merge-train/golden-main-20260331-final`, then rerun the prior
golden-lane checks and restore the previous PR body.

## Backfill Plan

After the lane is green, backfill the same workflow scoping and
governance-contract repairs into any surviving PRs that still touch
`.github/workflows/**` or governance surfaces, then close superseded PRs
against `#22309`.

## Validation Evidence

Local validation completed:
- `node scripts/ci/drift-sentinel.mjs`
- `ruby -e 'require "yaml"; ... YAML.load_file(...)'` over all edited
workflow files
- `jq . governance/pilot-ci-policy.json`
- `jq . governance/branch-protection.json`
- merge-marker scan over all edited files returned clean

## Notes

- Live GitHub PR checks on the open PR set are being converged through
this single branch instead of salvaging each broken lane independently.
- I did not run the full local verification matrix in this session; this
PR is intended to give the repo one clean convergence lane for CI and
human review.
- After this PR lands, the absorbed PRs should be closed as superseded.

---------

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: google-labs-jules[bot] <161369871+google-labs-jules[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Bot <bot@summit.ai>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Gemini CLI <gemini-cli@google.com>
@BrianCLong
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Superseded by #22309, which is now merged into main.

@BrianCLong BrianCLong closed this Mar 31, 2026
auto-merge was automatically disabled March 31, 2026 20:10

Pull request was closed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

auto-merge codex Codex-owned implementation work risk:low

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant