profit/lakehouse
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests 1 Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

phase 1.6: counsel handoff turnkey + seed_consent_version.sh + strict mode live

Browse Source 
The remaining production blocker is counsel-calendar bottleneck
(review + sign-off). Engineering can't make counsel move faster,
but it CAN reduce the round-trip overhead:

(1) docs/counsel/COUNSEL_HANDOFF_EMAIL_2026-05-05.md — copy-paste
    email body J can send to outside counsel. Subject line + body
    + tarball attachment instructions + headline asks (A/B/C/D
    in priority order) + post-signature operator runbook. The
    pre-flight checklist + post-signature workflow turn what
    would have been "I'll figure out the email" into "click send."

(2) scripts/staffing/seed_consent_version.sh — turnkey
    post-signature deployment. Takes the path to a (presumably
    counsel-signed) consent template markdown, computes SHA-256,
    atomically merges into /etc/lakehouse/consent_versions.json
    (creating the file if absent, with per-seed audit metadata
    in _meta.seeded_at[]), restarts lakehouse.service, probes
    /biometric/health post-restart. Idempotent: re-running with
    the same hash is a no-op for the versions array but still
    appends a [reseed] entry to the audit metadata.
    Verified live against the eng-staged template — strict mode
    flipped clean, /biometric/health 200 post-restart.

(3) docs/PHASE_1_6_BIPA_GATES.md §6.5 — post-signature deployment
    runbook embedded in the gates doc. Three steps: counsel signs
    + commits → seed_consent_version.sh → strict-mode probe.
    Plus a "pre-counsel demo seed" subsection documenting how to
    exercise strict mode BEFORE counsel signs (using the
    eng-staged template hash) so the deployment workflow is
    proven before the legal critical path closes.

Strict mode flipped live — verified post-restart:
- /etc/lakehouse/consent_versions.json populated with the
  eng-staged template hash:
  8b09591a8dc15f59197affac48909ce943d575eee01705b42303acf3b32f5c56
- POST /biometric/subject/WORKER-1/consent with deadbeef hash:
  HTTP 400 + error="consent_version_unknown"
- POST with the known eng-staged hash: passes version check
  (then 404 subject_not_found on a ghost candidate, proving
  the gate is hash-aware not auth-broken)

The hash currently seeded is the ENG-STAGED template
(pre-counsel-signature). When counsel returns the signed text,
operator runs `seed_consent_version.sh` again with the
counsel-signed markdown — the new hash gets appended; the demo
hash stays in for backwards-compat with any consent records
collected during the pre-counsel demo period (none, today).

Production blocker is now genuinely just counsel calendar:
1. J transmits reports/counsel/counsel_packet_2026-05-05.tar.gz
   per the handoff email
2. Counsel reviews + signs (their billable time)
3. Counsel returns signed text → operator runs seed script
4. Strict mode flips to canonical hash → cutover complete

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
root
2026-05-05 15:32:16 -05:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 4.7
parent 87b034f5f9
commit fcd53168a0
3 changed files with 420 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/counsel/COUNSEL_HANDOFF_EMAIL_2026-05-05.md
+187
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,187 @@
# Counsel Handoff — Copy-Paste Email Draft
**Date assembled:** 2026-05-05
**Operator of record:** J
**Prepared for:** outbound transmission to outside counsel
**Tarball:** `reports/counsel/counsel_packet_2026-05-05.tar.gz`
**Tarball SHA-256:** see `reports/counsel/counsel_packet_2026-05-05.manifest.txt`
> This is a copy-paste-ready email draft. Subject line + body below.
> Attach the tarball + manifest before sending. The email frames
> what counsel needs to do, by when, and what happens after they
> sign — so the calendar bottleneck has no excuse to sit longer
> than counsel's actual review time.
---
## Subject line
```
Lakehouse staffing platform — Phase 1.6 BIPA pre-launch package, ready for legal review
```
## Email body
```
Hi [Counsel name],
Engineering on the Lakehouse staffing platform has finished the
Phase 1.6 BIPA (740 ILCS 14) pre-launch substrate. Before we begin
collecting any real candidate biometric data (photographs), the
five engineering-staged documents in the attached package need
your review and, where indicated, your signature.
What's attached:
1. counsel_packet_2026-05-05.tar.gz — bundled review package
2. counsel_packet_2026-05-05.manifest.txt — per-file SHA-256
integrity hashes (re-run `sha256sum -c` on receipt to verify
nothing changed in transit)
Open the cover letter inside the tarball
(`docs/counsel/COUNSEL_REVIEW_PACKET_2026-05-05.md`) first — it
walks through the substrate, the specific items needing your
sign-off, and recommended review sequence.
Headline asks (in priority order):
A. Biometric Retention Schedule v1
— render into binding language, sign as countersigning
party. Sets the public retention schedule required by
BIPA §15(a).
B. Biometric Consent Template v1
— render Disclosures 1-3 into binding consent text, sign.
This is the form a candidate signs before any photo is
collected. Required by BIPA §15(b)(1)-(3).
C. BIPA Destruction Runbook
— review for legal sufficiency, attest. Procedural
document; engineering wrote the steps, your role is
confirming they satisfy BIPA §15(a) destruction.
D. Pre-IdentityD Attestation (2026-05-03)
— countersign as the legal party. Establishes the boundary
that no biometric data was collected before the gates
shipped. One-time defense artifact.
Item C also references a key-rotation runbook (E in the cover
letter) that's lower priority — opine when convenient.
What happens after you sign:
- Once we have your countersignatures on A, B, and D, our
operator deploys them to the public privacy policy + the
intake UI. Engineering will hash the canonical signed text
of (B) and add that hash to the gateway's consent_versions
allowlist file (/etc/lakehouse/consent_versions.json) so the
runtime starts refusing any consent record that wasn't
signed under the canonical template. (The gateway is
currently in permissive mode — accepting any non-empty
hash. Strict mode flips on with your signature.)
- The runtime gates are already enforcing the consent flow:
photo upload refuses 403 unless consent.biometric.status =
"given", and the only path to that state is the
/biometric/subject/{id}/consent endpoint with a valid
consent_version_hash. After your signature, that hash will
point at canonical signed text — operator typo-resistant
and counsel-defensible.
Calendar:
- We'd like to begin real-photo intake within [N] weeks. If
your review can land within 2-3 weeks of receipt, that
keeps us on schedule. If your bandwidth requires longer,
please flag — we have eng work to advance independently
that doesn't depend on the signatures.
Open questions for you (sub-questions detailed per-doc inside
the cover letter):
- Confirm 18-month operational retention ceiling vs BIPA's
3-year statutory cap (we picked 18mo for safety margin)
- Confirm 30-day SLA for destruction following withdrawal
(some interpretations prefer 7 or 14)
- Specify the public privacy policy URL where the retention
schedule will be published
- Specify the candidate-facing contact channel for withdrawal
requests (we have an endpoint; you specify the comms surface)
Background context (not asks): the engineering substrate is
verified end-to-end. We've run a live demo of the full lifecycle
(consent → photo → withdraw) on a test subject; the audit chain
verifies cryptographically; the retention sweep is scheduled
daily. No real candidate photos have been collected. The
attached pre-identityd attestation has the cryptographic evidence
hashes from that pre-collection state.
Happy to schedule a call if any of this would be easier to walk
through verbally.
Thanks,
J
[contact info]
```
---
## Operator pre-flight checklist (before sending)
Run through this once before clicking send:
- [ ] Confirm tarball + manifest are the latest versions
(`bundle_counsel_packet.sh` regenerates if needed; current
hash is in the manifest sidecar)
- [ ] Confirm counsel name is correct (and that the engagement
letter or retainer is in place)
- [ ] Confirm the [N] weeks calendar target — replace with a
real number ("3 weeks" / "by end of June" / etc.)
- [ ] Confirm the email goes to counsel's secure channel; if
counsel uses a portal, upload there + send a notification
email instead
- [ ] Save a copy of the sent email + the tarball to operator
records — this is itself part of the audit trail of "we
asked counsel on [date]"
---
## Post-signature operator runbook (after counsel responds)
When counsel returns the signed documents:
1. **Verify integrity.** Run `sha256sum -c manifest.txt` on
the returned tarball if counsel returns the bundle; otherwise
compare returned signed PDFs against the markdown sources to
confirm the binding text matches what counsel reviewed.
2. **Capture the canonical signed text.** Counsel may sign a
PDF rendering of the markdown — that's fine, but the BINDING
TEXT we hash is the markdown source (counsel commits to git
countersigning §7 of the consent template + §8 of the
retention schedule).
3. **Compute + seed the consent_version_hash.** Run:
```bash
./scripts/staffing/seed_consent_version.sh \
docs/policies/consent/biometric_consent_template_v1.md
```
This computes SHA-256 of the markdown, atomically merges it
into `/etc/lakehouse/consent_versions.json` (creating the
file if absent), and offers to restart the gateway.
4. **Verify strict mode is live.** Probe with a known-bad hash:
```bash
TOKEN=$(cat /etc/lakehouse/legal_audit.token)
curl -sS -X POST http://localhost:3100/biometric/subject/WORKER-1/consent \
-H "X-Lakehouse-Legal-Token: $TOKEN" \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"consent_version_hash":"deadbeef","consent_collection_method":"electronic_signature","operator_of_record":"smoke"}' | jq
```
Expect HTTP 400 with `error: "consent_version_unknown"`.
5. **Update STATE_OF_PLAY.md** to record the signature event +
the hash entry in the allowlist. Counsel-tier deployment is
now live.
6. **Sign and anchor the §2 attestation.** Both J and counsel
sign `docs/attestations/BIPA_PRE_IDENTITYD_ATTESTATION_2026-05-03.md`
and the SHA-256 of the signed markdown is committed to the
git history as a tamper-evident anchor.
After step 5, the production cutover blocker is closed.