Skip to content
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
# 1) FOUNDATION STRUCTURE

**Legal structure:** establish the **CAC Governance Foundation (CGF)** as a U.S. 501(c)(3) non-profit with a parallel EU AISBL affiliate for regulatory interoperability, and a wholly governed operating subsidiary that executes certification operations under board-approved policy.

**Governance model:**
- **Board of Trustees (9 seats):** 2 Summit-appointed seats, 2 enterprise adopters, 2 accredited auditors, 1 civil-society/public-interest seat, 1 academic cryptography/governance seat, 1 independent chair elected by supermajority.
- **Technical Steering Committee (TSC):** maintains CAC specification and conformance profiles.
- **Certification Policy Committee (CPC):** governs CACert issuance policy, key ceremonies, and incident response.
- **Regulatory & Assurance Council (RAC):** non-voting advisory body including regulators and standards liaisons.

**Decision-making process:**
- Ordinary decisions: simple majority.
- Normative spec changes, trust-root changes, or policy exceptions: **2/3 board supermajority** plus recorded TSC/CPC recommendation.
- Emergency actions: time-boxed (max 30 days), auto-expire unless ratified.

**Control without visible centralization:** Summit keeps strategic continuity via charter-encoded founder rights that are narrow and transparent (mission lock, anti-fragmentation veto, and brand integrity), while day-to-day governance is multi-stakeholder and vote-auditable.

# 2) STANDARD OWNERSHIP MODEL

**Ownership of CAC spec:** the CAC specification, schemas, reference test vectors, and conformance suites are assigned to CGF under irrevocable IP contribution agreements and licensed under a royalty-free public specification license.

**Update proposal path:**
1. Public CAC Change Proposal (CCP) submitted via repository template.
2. Mandatory impact statement (security, compliance, interoperability, migration cost).
3. Two independent implementation reports (or one implementation + one formal review).
4. TSC recommendation with disposition.
5. Board ratification for normative changes.

**Approval and anti-fragmentation controls:**
- No vendor-private forks can claim “CAC compliant” unless they pass official conformance and transparency-log inclusion.
- Compatibility guarantees enforced by profile policy and deprecation windows.

**Versioning model:**
- **Major** (breaking normative semantics): 24-month support overlap.
- **Minor** (backward-compatible normative additions): quarterly release window.
- **Patch** (clarification/editorial/security errata): continuous, signed bulletins.
- Stable profile tags: `CAC-Core`, `CAC-Regulated`, `CAC-High-Assurance`.

**Public comment process:**
- 45-day public review for major/minor CCPs.
- 14-day review for critical security errata.
- Published adjudication log: every comment receives an accepted/rejected/deferred disposition with rationale.

# 3) CERTIFICATION AUTHORITY

**Who can issue CACert:** only CGF-accredited Certification Service Providers (CSPs) can issue operational CACerts; CGF Root Certification Authority (RCA) signs CSP intermediates and policy manifests.

**Key management model:**
- Offline CGF root key in HSM-backed split custody.
- Threshold ceremonies (M-of-N) with independent witness quorum.
- Intermediates with short-lived validity and mandatory rotation.
- Hardware-backed signing + immutable ceremony transcripts in transparency log.

**Trust anchor distribution:**
- Published root bundle via foundation site, signed package registries, and checksum-notarized mirrors.
- Machine-consumable trust metadata (TUF-style targets + revocation channels).

**Revocation mechanism:**
- Dual-path revocation: signed CRL + low-latency status endpoint.
- Mandatory “must-staple” equivalent for high-assurance profiles.
- Incident-triggered emergency distrust bulletin with deterministic client behavior.

**Multi-signer model:**
- CACert issuance requires two independent signatures: accredited CSP key + CGF policy attestation key.
- High-assurance CACert additionally requires third signature from independent audit attestor.

# 4) ECOSYSTEM GOVERNANCE

**Vendors**
- **Rights:** implement CAC, submit CCPs, apply for CSP accreditation, vote in vendor constituency elections.
- **Responsibilities:** pass conformance suites, publish security advisories, maintain upgrade compatibility.
- **Incentives:** certification marks, procurement eligibility, reduced enterprise due-diligence friction.

**Auditors**
- **Rights:** participate in assurance working groups, issue independent validation statements.
- **Responsibilities:** perform periodic controls testing, disclose conflicts, publish attestation evidence.
- **Incentives:** recognized accreditation pathway, recurring assessment engagements.

**Partners (integrators/SIs/clouds)**
- **Rights:** co-author implementation profiles, join interoperability plugfests.
- **Responsibilities:** preserve chain-of-trust semantics end to end, support customer evidence export.
- **Incentives:** preferred ecosystem tier, co-marketing and reference architecture status.

**Observers (regulators, academia, civil society)**
- **Rights:** public comment priority windows, advisory recommendations, hearing participation.
- **Responsibilities:** provide non-binding scrutiny and gap identification.
- **Incentives:** transparent visibility into an auditable, stable control regime.

# 5) TRUST MODEL

**Why external parties trust CAC:**
- Governance is legally independent, operationally multi-stakeholder, and cryptographically verifiable.
- Certification is reproducible through public conformance artifacts and transparency proofs.
- Policy changes are publicly reviewable and cannot be silently introduced.

**Neutrality safeguards:**
- Balanced board seat allocation and rotating committee chairs.
- Mandatory conflict-of-interest disclosures, recusals, and published voting records.
- Independent ombuds channel with appeal rights and timeline SLAs.

**Conflict handling:**
- Tiered dispute resolution: technical mediation (TSC) → assurance arbitration (CPC/RAC panel) → board adjudication.
- Binding anti-capture clauses: no single constituency can pass trust-root or normative changes unilaterally.

**Transparency and auditability mechanisms:**
- Public agenda, minutes, vote records, and change dispositions.
- Cryptographic transparency log for certificates, revocations, key ceremonies, and policy bundles.
- Annual independent governance, security, and financial audits with published findings and remediation tracking.

# 6) TRANSITION PLAN (CRITICAL)

**0–30 days (Founding lock-in):**
- Incorporate CGF, appoint interim trustees, execute IP assignment and trademark license terms.
- Publish charter, bylaws, conflict policy, and capture-resistance clauses.
- Freeze CAC v1.0 as baseline with signed provenance.

**31–90 days (Operational transfer):**
- Stand up CGF RCA with witnessed root ceremony and first trust-anchor publication.
- Accredit initial CSP cohort (including Summit-operated CSP under identical controls).
- Move standards repo, CCP workflow, and public comment process under CGF governance.

**91–180 days (External validation + scale):**
- Complete first independent assurance audit and publish results.
- Launch regulator and enterprise observer program with quarterly hearings.
- Require all new “CAC compliant” claims to reference CGF conformance IDs and transparency proofs.

**What remains proprietary vs open:**
- **Open:** CAC core specification, profiles, conformance tests, verification tooling interfaces, trust metadata, policy docs, and transparency proofs.
- **Proprietary (Summit):** product UX, optimization engines, enterprise workflow automation, managed service operations, and non-normative analytics IP.

**Control preservation while maximizing adoption:**
- Summit retains durable influence through founder seats, authored reference implementations, and ecosystem enablement assets, while legitimacy shifts to independent governance and auditable multi-party certification.
- Anti-fork trademark and conformance controls prevent fragmentation, and multi-stakeholder ratification preserves credibility with regulators and auditors.
10 changes: 5 additions & 5 deletions docs/roadmap/STATUS.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"last_updated": "2026-04-03T00:00:00Z",
"revision_note": "Added the canonical Decision Object v1 schema package, example payload, and standards documentation to anchor CAC-bound decision interoperability and external verification workflows.",
"last_updated": "2026-03-31T00:00:00Z",
"revision_note": "Added the CAC Governance Foundation and Certification Authority operating blueprint to separate CAC standard ownership from Summit operations while preserving anti-capture control and global certification trust.",
"initiatives": [
{
"id": "one-verified-workflow-lane",
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@
"id": "provable-system-governance-provenance-unification",
"status": "in_progress",
"owner": "codex",
"notes": "Implementation-ready governance, provenance, isolation, sovereignty, and ATO-native evidence bundle specifications are published and awaiting narrowed execution through one golden workflow. Published C2PA-aligned CAC Decision Manifest profile and external verification contract for admissible cognition artifacts."
"notes": "Implementation-ready governance, provenance, isolation, sovereignty, and ATO-native evidence bundle specifications are published and awaiting narrowed execution through one golden workflow."
},
{
"id": "antigravity-multi-agent-ga-convergence",
Expand All @@ -69,10 +69,10 @@
"notes": "Multi-agent prompt suites, bounded charters, and router activation are in place, but GA still depends on proving one deterministic closed loop rather than widening orchestration."
},
{
"id": "decision-object-canonicalization",
"id": "cac-governance-foundation-certification-authority",
"status": "completed",
"owner": "codex",
"notes": "Published schemas/decision-object.schema.json plus a complete example and standards profile for CAC-bound deterministic verification."
"notes": "Published a six-part governance design covering independent foundation structure, standard ownership lifecycle, certification authority trust model, ecosystem roles, neutrality/audit controls, and a 0-180 day transition from Summit-operated to foundation-governed CAC stewardship."
}
],
"summary": {
Expand Down
Loading