Commit graph

7 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
CLU
c994a785a4 feat: render the public site from the database
The site is now a view over bigtech.db, not a hand-maintained set of pages.

- packages/core/db/render.mjs emits report/<product>.html and method.html into
  web/public, so Vite copies them into the deployable bundle. Re-running
  db:build regenerates them from whatever the database currently says.
- The report page leads with the score, then the dimension table with the
  weakest rung highlighted, then findings, then the evidence table with its
  tiers, then what was not tested, then how to clone and re-run the audit.
- The method page publishes the eight weights, the evidence tiers, both caps
  (reproducible builds and the closed-source ladder), the D1-D4 dynamic test,
  and a plain section on what the method cannot do.

Deployable bundle is 372K: the game, the method, the oath, the catalog and the
report. No server-side code, so it can sit on a Caddy static root and be nobody
else's problem to host.

Rendered 1 report page + method.html. All instrument checks still pass.
2026-10-29 16:24:13 -05:00
CLU
0979f032dc feat: the closed-source ladder, and why self-attestation is a declaration
Christian: 'The goal is not to hamstring closed source developers. It's just to
validate clean code.'

Right. So the cap is a rung, not a wall, and it now says so.

  L0 unattested   -> 3    nothing but your word
  L1 declared     -> 5    SBOM + signed hash + published destination allowlist
  L2 observed     -> 7    someone other than you watched this exact binary
  L3 reproducible -> 9    anyone can rebuild it and get the same bytes
  L4 contested    -> 10   someone tried to break it and published the attempt

A court filing lifts the ceiling entirely, because it needs no vendor cooperation.

db/attest/validate.mjs computes the level from which artifacts exist. A vendor
cannot claim one. The load-bearing rule is the attestor column:

  a vendor running our harness produces a DECLARATION, not an OBSERVATION.

Verified against three cases. A vendor claiming L2 with their own capture report
is downgraded to L1 and fails validation. The same artifacts with us as attestor
grant L2. A broken rebuild claim never reaches L3.

Levels 3 and 4 survive a self-run on purpose: a public rebuild recipe and a
published adversarial review can be re-executed or re-read by anyone, so who
pressed the button stops mattering.

Honest limit, written into the module: this cannot prove the absence of a
backdoor. Rice's theorem makes that undecidable, and a backdoor triggered by
remote config or message content is invisible to static inspection. An
attestation raises the cost and shortens the shelf life. It is not a proof.
2026-10-29 16:07:55 -05:00
CLU
83cca68965 feat: the Signal rumor ledger, and the half point it earned
Christian: 'If we can give it a higher rating or if we can dispel rumors, then we
need to make that part of our first post.'

Discipline first: debunking a rumor must not buy score, or the instrument
becomes a PR department with a database attached.

What the rumors actually did was correct one under-informed dimension.

- incident_record 7 -> 8. The 2026 'Signal was hacked' panic is a documented
  phishing campaign. FBI/CISA PSA260626 says plainly that the app and its
  encryption were not compromised, Signal published a precise correction within
  days and shipped linkage confirmations by 2026-05-13. Fast, accurate,
  independently corroborated.
- Total 75.9 -> 76.4. Half a point. That is the correct size.
- Everything else was already priced in: the OTF funding was already docked under
  ownership, the phone number already docked under user control.

Evidence rows added for the FBI advisory, Signal's statement, the itemised
,955,000 OTF funding record (2013-2016), and the UK/Sweden exit commitments.

The recompute gate verified 76.4 from the weights and scores, not from trust.
2026-10-29 15:30:00 -05:00
CLU
76e3e6c0f2 feat: the closed-source rule, and the board
Christian, 2026-10-29: 'Closed source software, you have no idea. And then all
we have is reputation. So you kind of start with one arm or two arms tied
behind your back.'

That is now arithmetic instead of an opinion.

- assessment.source_available: 1 = we can read the code, 0 = we cannot.
- Closed source cannot exceed 5 on ANY dimension without tier-1 or tier-2
  evidence of kind 'capture' or 'filing'. Reputation is tier 3, and tier 3 is
  not a measurement. The build fails if a closed-source score breaks the rule.
- Verifiability still caps at 3 with no reproducible build.

Practical ceiling for closed source: 86/100 in theory, if every dimension is
backed by a capture or a court filing. In practice it is a fight for a C.

- product.priority puts a human's ask ahead of a crawler's discovery.
- v_backlog orders by priority, then measured usage.
- migrate(): the database authors itself, so it must survive its own schema
  changes. Add columns, drop views, let schema.sql recreate them. Never drop
  and rebuild, which would destroy the self-authored roster.

On the board: Slack (closed, capped) and Kino (closed, capped, founders call
2026-10-30 17:00). Neither is scored. Neither gets a number until it has
evidence.
2026-10-29 15:23:31 -05:00
CLU
d433a0e75e feat: self-authoring ingest, relevance gate, and the Ranch Oath
The roster writes itself. The scores do not.

- db/ingest/sources.mjs: GitHub and Flathub adapters. GitHub is ranked by
  stars (usage); Flathub is a curated store of end-user Linux apps, so
  relevance is free there and has to be earned on GitHub.
- db/ingest/run.mjs: discovers into the roster as unassessed products, never
  as scores. Every discovery leaves a receipt (source, url, usage metric,
  timestamp) so a reader can see where a product came from and why it ranks.
- LooksLikeUserSoftware gate: topic:messaging sorts RabbitMQ to the top
  because brokers are highly starred and are not things people install.
- build.mjs no longer wipes the database. The DB authors itself, so a rebuild
  would have thrown the roster away. --fresh is now explicit.
- v_backlog view: what to assess next, ordered by measured usage.
- packages/web/public/oath.html: the Ranch Oath, with an ASCII Bible crest,
  bound to a SHA-256 of catalog.json. The page recomputes the digest in the
  browser and reports VERIFIED or BROKEN. An oath you cannot break is decoration.

Roster now 122 products, 1 assessed. All instrument checks pass.
2026-10-29 13:23:57 -05:00
CLU
b6a3b0722b docs: document the living-database workflow and its enforced rules 2026-10-29 13:17:21 -05:00
CLU
de53ac41a5 bigtech.sucks: living database + first assessment
The database is the source of truth; the site is a view over it.

- packages/core/db/schema.sql: vendors, products, categories, the 8-dimension
  instrument, assessments, scores, evidence, findings, off-ramp, plus the
  derived v_product_score view the game reads.
- packages/core/db/build.mjs: rebuilds bigtech.db, absorbs the legacy 43-product
  roster as unassessed, applies seeds, then verifies the instrument's own rules
  (weights sum to 100, totals recompute, grades match bands, every score has a
  rationale, no tier-4 evidence on a scored dimension, reproducible-build caps
  actually enforced).
- packages/core/db/seed/0001-signal.sql: Signal Desktop 8.36.0-alpha.1 on linux,
  75.9/100 grade B, weakest dimension local_data_exposure. Evidence points at
  the re-runnable audit artifacts in the Servetus vault.
- packages/core/src/data/generated/catalog.{ts,json}: generated export.

Verified: 44 products, 1 assessed, all checks pass.
2026-10-29 13:16:29 -05:00