"RootZero__Deed": "RootZero00_Challenge": "RootZero000_NonNormativeNotice": "This Challenge section is non-normative narrative. Validators MUST NOT treat Challenge prose as consensus-critical rules. Validity is determined by the canonical byte grammar, hashing rules, and signature verification requirements defined in Thin Law sections." "RootZero000_Title": "RSBIS Root Zero Open Invitation — Prove Our Claims False" "RootZero001_Tone": "Constitutional, precise, open" "RootZero002_Thesis": "The Root Zero Vault makes bold claims:\n- That its mathematics are proven\n- That its system design is sound\n- That this design solves sixteen major unsolved problems\n- That buying carries less risk and opens more opportunities than ignoring or forking\nIf these claims are false, prove them false." "RootZero003_OpenInvitation": "RootZero00301_Statement": "We invite you to create an R&D copy of the Root Zero Vault. Study it. Test it. Attempt to break it. Publish your findings openly. This is not competition. It is a constitutional experiment. Every valid critique makes the structure stronger." "RootZero004_ClaimsUnderChallenge": "RootZero00401_Mathematics": "counterexample": "Show a valid case where bijection fails, collisions occur, or hierarchy cycles emerge." "statement": "RSBIS IDs are bijective, collision-free, and recursively deterministic." "RootZero00402_Design": "counterexample": "Demonstrate an internal inconsistency, regression, or contradiction in structure." "statement": "RSBIS is base-agnostic, stage-aware, recursive, and turn-order capable." "RootZero00403_ProblemSolving": "counterexample": "Show one or more of these problems remain unsolved when RSBIS is correctly applied." "problems": "P01_secret_zero": "Fragile trust initialization ('secret zero')" "P02_kill_switch": "AI kill switch / blackout risk" "P03_inheritance": "Digital inheritance and continuity gaps" "P04_provenance": "Provenance collapse (deepfakes, tampered logs, siloed attestations)" "P05_regulation": "Regulatory fragmentation and audit opacity" "P06_ai_governance": "AI governance and misalignment" "P07_adoption": "Adoption barriers (no rip/replace feasible)" "P08_crypto_horizon": "Cryptographic horizon / post-quantum risk" "P09_supply_chain": "Global supply chain opacity and counterfeiting" "P10_financial_inclusion": "Financial inclusion and cross-border payments" "P11_research_integrity": "Scientific research integrity and reproducibility crisis" "P12_refugee_identity": "Forced migration and refugee identity" "P13_environmental_accountability": "Environmental crime and climate accountability" "P14_healthcare_interoperability": "Fragmented healthcare records and patient safety risks" "P15_trade_finance": "Fraud, duplication, and settlement delays in letters of credit" "P16_election_integrity": "Voter trust collapse, fraud, and lack of transparent auditability" "statement": "RSBIS addresses sixteen pressing, costly, and unsolved problems." "RootZero005_GameTheory": "RootZero00501_Argument": "Prove that ignoring the system or running an unlicensed fork carries less total risk—and opens equal opportunities—compared to buying a Standard ID." "RootZero00502_Categories_RiskAndOpportunity": - "Financial" - "Legal" - "Geopolitical" - "National" - "Legacy" "RootZero006_Reward": "RootZero00601_Statement": "No rewards are offered. Truth itself is the measure. If our claims fail, the flaw will be public. If our claims stand, the system speaks for itself." "RootZero007_LandlordResponse": "RootZero00701_Response_Position": "The Landlord affirms:\n- Mathematics fears no scrutiny\n- Structural design welcomes audit\n- Bold claims must be tested openly\nPractical steps are offered only to lower barriers of entry.\nThe seriousness of the invitation remains unchanged.\nProve our claims false, or witness their endurance.\nEither way, the only outcome is a better world." "RootZero008_SubmissionProcess": "RootZero00801_Compose_Format": "Canonical YAML, proofs, or critiques" "RootZero00802_Disclose_Publish": "Use Cred, X, or other open platforms to post your proof" "RootZero00803_Evaluate": "The community will decide" "RootZero00804_Flow_Cadence": "Rolling, open-ended" "RootZero00805_Verdict": "Claims stand unless disproven" "RootZero009_Notes": "RootZero00901_Clarify_Intent": "This is not superiority. This is not competition. This is a standing invitation: If our mathematics, system design, problem-solving, or risk claims are flawed, let it be proven in the open." "RootZero010_EvaluatorGuidance": "RootZero01001_Approach": "Use AI tools as assistants. Upload this document and ask: “Help me break these claims by analyzing the proofs and examples.” When you test a claim, cite the specific RootZero0240_Specimens bundle (Acceptance or Rejection) you used, including the relevant policy_codes and checklist steps." "RootZero01002_Study": "Begin with these critical sections:\n- RootZero0130_Constitution\n- RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure\n- RootZero0240_Specimens\n- RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy\n- RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist\n- RootZero0220_ConversionRules\n- RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption\n- RootZero02_Journal\n- RootZero03_PublicAccountingRegistry\n- RootZero010004_ToolingAndConformance" "RootZero01003_Test": "Can you find a flaw the AI cannot explain away after reviewing these sections?" "RootZero01004_Tip": "Findings may be informal writeups or structured proofs in YAML. Post them anywhere public. The community decides." "RootZero01005_Clarify": "AI is an assistant, not the judge. Only structured counterexamples, reproducible proofs, or rigorous critiques count as disproof. Summaries or opinions alone do not." "RootZero01_KnowMe": "Explainer": "RootZero01(A)_Title": "Understanding What You're Evaluating" "RootZero01(A1)_NoteOnParentheticalIDs": "The use of parentheses in identifiers such as (A), (B), (C), etc., is an intentional demonstration of Unicode base power. The character \"(\" (U+0028) sorts lexicographically before digits (U+0030–U+0039) and letters (U+0041–U+005A / U+0061–U+007A). This means that when new sections need to be inserted into the canonical tree, no renumbering or re-IDing is required. The parenthesis character establishes a new insertion namespace that maintains perfect canonical order. This approach exemplifies the principle of structural extensibility: expansion without mutation. Each identifier therefore demonstrates both mathematical determinism and Unicode awareness in its structural design." "RootZero01(B)_Description": "RSBIS identifiers function as 4D databases: the first three dimensions encode ancestry, sequence, and coordinates, while the fourth dimension contains local intent logic — and crucially, each identifier automatically inherits all rules and laws from its complete parent chain by default (unless normative_anchor lawfully resets normative inheritance to RootZero)." "RootZero01(C)_MathematicalBreakthrough": "automatic_inheritance": - ">- Inherits ALL rules (default; subject to normative_anchor (Root-only reset)) from RootZero (Root Zero constitutional law)" - ">- Inherits ALL rules (default; subject to normative_anchor (Root-only reset)) from RootZero1 (first-level sovereignty rules)" - ">- Inherits ALL rules (default; subject to normative_anchor (Root-only reset)) from RootZero19 (second-level local policies)" - ">- Inherits ALL rules (default; subject to normative_anchor (Root-only reset)) from RootZero197 (third-level specific constraints)" - ">- Can add own rules for children but cannot violate inherited constraints" "example_identifier": "RootZero1976" "expansion_capabilities": - ">- Can generate unlimited children: RootZero19760, RootZero19761, RootZero197600…" - ">- Each child automatically inherits the complete rule stack by default (subject to normative_anchor (Root-only reset))" - ">- Rules cascade down deterministically without external systems" "four_d_dataset": "dimension1_ancestry": "Complete parent chain: RootZero → RootZero1 → RootZero19 → RootZero197 → RootZero1976" "dimension2_sequence": "0-indexed position = 6 under canonical sort (NFC + LF, lexicographic by Unicode code points). Among siblings [\"RootZero1970\", ..., \"RootZero1979\"], the terminal character '6' is U+0036, which sorts after '5' (U+0035) and before '7' (U+0037). Predecessor: RootZero1975; successor: RootZero1977." "dimension3_coordinates": "Unique collision-free global position derived from hierarchical math" "dimension4_logic": "Local rules this ID can set for its children, plus inherited governance from all ancestors" "what_each_digit_encodes": - ">- U+0031 ('1'): child_index=1 (0-indexed) → 2nd child under parent RootZero → forms 'RootZero1'" - ">- U+0039 ('9'): child_index=9 (0-indexed) → 10th child under parent RootZero1 → forms 'RootZero19'" - ">- U+0037 ('7'): child_index=7 (0-indexed) → 8th child under parent RootZero19 → forms 'RootZero197'" - ">- U+0036 ('6'): child_index=6 (0-indexed) → 7th child under parent RootZero197 → forms 'RootZero1976'" "RootZero01(D)_Implications": "infinite_scaling": "A single Deed grants unlimited namespace sovereignty under your branch." "mathematical_guarantees": "Collision-free across the system, deterministic validation, recomputable offline by any party anywhere." "policy_inheritance": "Rules flow automatically from Root Zero through the hierarchy and are verifiable via RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy." "structural_identity": "Each identifier contains its complete context. No external lookups are needed." "RootZero01(E)_BuildersAndAdapters": "adaptability": "Maximum flexibility to personalize local contexts and rules." "adapters": "Massive opportunity for adapters to solve trillion-dollar problems and make the world better." "builders": "Foundational infrastructure for builders to create solutions with sovereignty." "cryptographic_layer": "Uses already globally and legally accepted mathematical evidence." "RootZero01(F)_BusinessModel": "study_reference": "For evaluators: see RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption for detailed economics and adoption logic governing issuance and participation." "value_proposition": "Purchase mathematical infrastructure for infinite structured identity creation with built-in governance inheritance and collision-free guarantees." "RootZero01(G)_Transition": "note": "You're evaluating the first 4D database system where identifiers contain complete relational data plus inherited governance logic. The following technical specifications detail how this mathematical infrastructure works." "RootZero0100_FrontDoor": "RootZero010000_CanonicalByteGrammar": "ai_canon_writing_profile": "artifacts": "deed": "must": - "treat_deed_as_thin_law_identity_object" - "derive_cvid_from_deed_core_bytes_only" - "exclude_fields_cvid_and_signatures_from_cvid_preimage" - "include_all_nested_sub_ids_that_define_thin_law" - "use_signature_policy_as_enum_string_ed25519-only_pqc-only_dual" - "include_signature_algorithms_as_static_list" - "serialize_with_ascii_key_sort_everywhere" "must_not": - "embed_live_journal_entries_or_live_registry_entries_inside_deed_bytes" - "hash_deed_plus_journal_plus_registry_together_for_cvid" - "use_yaml_anchors_aliases_merge_keys_tags_or_comments" - "change_any_thin_law_post_genesis" "thin_law_scope_excludes": - "operational journal" - "public registry ledger" "journal_entry": "b64url_rule": "b64url_nopad MUST be RFC 4648 base64url without '=' padding; alphabet [-_A-Za-z0-9]." "must": - "record_every_action_in_journal_before_registry_mirror" - "enforce_required_fields_set" - "when_signature_policy_is_dual_require_ed25519_and_pqc_signatures" - "serialize_with_ascii_key_sort_everywhere" - "quote_ts_in_iso8601_utc" "must_not": - "create_registry_entry_without_corresponding_journal_entry" - "mutate_or_rewrite_prior_entries" - "use_non_deterministic_fields_inside_payload_without_defining_them" - "use_yaml_anchors_aliases_merge_keys_tags_or_comments" "parent_hash_rule": "parent_hash MUST equal blake3(canonical_bytes(prior_entry_sealed)). For genesis INIT entry, parent_hash MUST be null." "required_fields": - "payload" - "parent_hash" - "signature_policy" - "signatures" - "signer" - "ts" - "type" "sealed_definition": "sealed_entry_includes_signatures_true" "signature_encoding_rule": "Each signatures item MUST be a double-quoted string: sig:::. No other forms permitted." "signature_preimage_rule": "canonical_bytes(entry_without_signatures)" "signatures_order_rule": "If signature_policy is dual, signatures MUST be ordered [ed25519, pqc]." "registry_entry": "b64url_rule": "b64url_nopad MUST be RFC 4648 base64url without '=' padding; alphabet [-_A-Za-z0-9]." "must": - "mirror_reportable_journal_actions_to_public_registry_as_required" - "include_payload_with_journal_ref_and_hash" - "enforce_dual_signatures_where_declared" - "serialize_with_ascii_key_sort_everywhere" - "quote_ts_in_iso8601_utc" "must_not": - "exist_without_corresponding_journal_entry" - "use_payload_hash_of_unsealed_journal_entry" - "use_yaml_anchors_aliases_merge_keys_tags_or_comments" "payload_hash_rule": "payload.hash MUST equal blake3(canonical_bytes(referenced_journal_entry_sealed)). Any mismatch MUST be rejected." "required_fields": - "payload" - "signature_policy" - "signatures" - "signer" - "ts" - "type" "signature_encoding_rule": "Each signatures item MUST be a double-quoted string: sig:::. No other forms permitted." "signatures_order_rule": "If signature_policy is dual, signatures MUST be ordered [ed25519, pqc]." "canonicalization": "block_scalars": "allowed_chomping": - "|-" "allowed_only_for_multiline_text": true "forbid_folding": true "forbid_other_block_scalar_styles": true "directives": "FORBIDDEN" "duplicate_keys_policy": "REJECT" "encoding": "UTF-8" "flow_style": "FORBIDDEN_EXCEPT_EMPTY" "flow_style_empty_exception": "Empty sequences MUST be '[]' and empty mappings MUST be '{}' as the only permitted flow-style constructs." "forbidden_features": - "anchors" - "aliases" - "comments" - "directives_%YAML_%TAG" - "merge_keys_<<" - "custom_tags_!" - "tabs" - "crlf_or_cr_newlines" - "duplicate_keys" "idempotence": "REQUIRED" "key_charset": "ASCII_ONLY" "key_order_comparator": "BYTEWISE_ASCII" "key_sort_order": "ASCII_lexicographic_everywhere" "line_wrapping": "FORBIDDEN" "newlines": "LF" "notes": - "YAML has no block-literal form for empty sequences/mappings; canonical bytes therefore permit only '[]' and '{}' as empty literals under flow_style_empty_exception." "null_policy": "ALLOW_TYPED_NULL" "numeric_policy": "forbid_floats": true "forbid_scientific_notation": true "integers_must_not_have_leading_zero": true "scalar_rendering": "control_char_policy": "MUST_ESCAPE" "default_string_style": "ALWAYS_DOUBLE_QUOTED" "double_quoted_escape_policy": "JSON_ESCAPES_ONLY" "double_quoted_escape_set": - "\\\\" - "\\\"" - "\\n" - "\\r" - "\\t" - "\\b" - "\\f" - "\\uXXXX" "escape_preference_order": - "SHORT_JSON_ESCAPES" - "UNICODE_ESCAPES" "forbid_single_quoted_strings": true "forbid_uppercase_u8": true "non_ascii_policy": "PRESERVE_UTF8" "unicode_escape_hex_case": "UPPERCASE" "unicode_escape_rule": "When escaping is required: use SHORT_JSON_ESCAPES when applicable; otherwise use \\uXXXX with uppercase hex. Do not use \\UXXXXXXXX." "schema": "YAML_1_2_CORE_SCHEMA_ONLY" "sequence_order": "PRESERVE_AS_AUTHORED" "set_like_sequences_policy": "declaration_mechanism": "SCHEMA_ONLY" "default": "PRESERVE_AS_AUTHORED" "if_sequence_declared_as_set": "SORT_ASCII_FOR_STRINGS_ELSE_REJECT" "unicode_normalization": "NFC" "yaml_version": "1.2" "enforcement_level": "MUST" "id": "RSBIS_AI_CANON_WRITING_PROFILE" "normative": true "ordering_rule": "All YAML mappings MUST be serialized with keys sorted in ASCII lexicographic order at every depth using a bytewise ASCII comparator." "scalar_policy": "always_quote": - "ALL_STRINGS" "timestamp_policy": "forbid_fractional_seconds": true "forbid_offsets": true "format": "YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ" "must_be_utc_z": true "timestamps_must_be_double_quoted": true "test_vectors": "minimum_vectors": 5 "must_include": - "canonical_bytes_sha256" - "canonical_bytes_length" - "deedcore_blake3_cvid" - "journal_entry_sealed_hash_blake3" - "registry_entry_payload_hash_blake3" "purpose": "Prove canonicalizer equivalence across implementations; prevent forks." "required": true "vector_pack_naming": "RSBIS_CANON_TESTVEC_v_.zip" "validation_protocol": "preflight_checks": - "parse_as_yaml_1_2_with_duplicate_keys_rejected" - "confirm_no_forbidden_features_present_in_raw_bytes" - "confirm_yaml_1_2_core_schema_resolution" - "confirm_unicode_nfc_normalization" - "confirm_lf_only_newlines_no_trailing_whitespace" - "confirm_ascii_only_keys_and_bytewise_ascii_sort_everywhere" - "confirm_sequence_order_preserved" - "confirm_numeric_policy_no_floats_no_scientific_no_leading_zero_integers" - "canonicalizer_idempotence_canon(canon(x))_equals_canon(x)" - "record_byte_length_sha256_and_blake3_for_auditable_logs" "reject_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" - "E-SIG-POLICY" "version": "1.3.5" "RootZero010001_WhyNowManifesto": "index": - ">- P01: Secret-Zero (trust initialization) failure — see RootZero0240020903_AccessControlEnforcement:" - ">- P02: AI kill-switch / blackout risk — see RootZero0240020000_ContinuityBundleRecovery:" - ">- P03: Digital inheritance and continuity — see RootZero0240020402_InheritanceScenarioA:" - ">- P04: Provenance collapse (media, models, records) — see RootZero0240020711_Integration_HashMismatch_Rejection:" - ">- P05: Regulatory fragmentation and audit opacity — see RootZero02400337_PrivacyPreservingAudit:" - ">- P06: AI governance and misalignment — see RootZero0240020201_AIAccountabilityTrail:" - ">- P07: Wrap existing systems (no rip/replace) — enabling adoption now — see RootZero0240020700_RegistryMirrorDemo:" - ">- P08: Cryptographic horizon (post-quantum continuity) — see RootZero0240020101_PQCUpgradePath:" - ">- P09: Global supply chain opacity and counterfeiting — see RootZero0240021000_EnterpriseVaultDemo:" - ">- P10: Financial inclusion and cross-border payments — see RootZero0240020302_CreditIssuanceExample:" - ">- P11: Scientific research integrity and reproducibility crisis — see RootZero0240020904_DataIntegrityPreserved:" - ">- P12: Forced migration and refugee identity — see RootZero0240020001_Refugee_Identity_Continuity:" - ">- P13: Environmental crime and climate accountability — see RootZero0240020901_ClimateRiskPreparedness:" - ">- P14: Healthcare data interoperability and patient safety — see RootZero02400337_PrivacyPreservingAudit:" - ">- P15: Trade finance & letters of credit — fraud and settlement delays — see RootZero0240020304_AssetValuationAudit:" - ">- P16: Election integrity — privacy-preserving auditability — see RootZero0240020601_GovernanceVotingAudit:" "thesis": "The world is not broken; it is unstructured. RSBIS imposes order where trust collapses: at genesis, at succession, at provenance, at governance, and at blackout. We move the source of truth from operational secrets to structural math. Trust becomes a recomputable property of the record, not a promise about a server." "RootZero010002_ProblemsAndStructuralResponses": - "pain_points": - "HSMs, root keys, and bootstrap ceremonies create single points of failure." - "Credential rotation, recovery, and insider risk consume security budgets." - "Courts and regulators cannot recompute trust; they subpoena custodians." "problem": "P01 — Secret Zero (trust initialization) is fragile, costly, and endlessly rotated." "rsbis_response": "outcome": "Trust shifts from continuous operational dependence to static, recomputable structure." "properties": - "Deterministic acceptance under thin law." - "Offline recomputability without trusted runtime." - "Lineage proof by leading-zeros ancestry, not by account state." "structural_shift": "Legitimacy arises from the Deed’s immutable identity and its mathematically verifiable ancestry. Verification is deterministic over canonical bytes (CVID), not dependent on an out-of-band secret. Signature policy declaration makes continuity survive cryptographic transitions (ed25519-only → pqc-only → beyond)." - "pain_points": - "If platforms fail, credentials die with them; governance halts." - "Emergency revocations and centralized toggles create systemic risk." - "Audits after blackouts lack portable, verifiable evidence." "problem": "P02 — AI kill switch / blackout risk (operational coercion of critical systems)." "rsbis_response": "continuity_design": "No kill switch. Deeds carry rules; Journals carry evidence; Registry anchors finality. ContinuityBundles enable cold-start verification in court or bunker without online services. Declared signature policies ensure recomputability even after cryptographic shifts." "mechanics": - "Append-only Journal with parent-hash continuity." - "Registry receipts (ADES) for economic finality." - ">- ContinuityBundle: {policy, journal segment, registry receipts, validator keys, signature_policy}." "outcome": "Operations can stop; legitimacy does not. Verification survives blackouts." - "pain_points": - "Families and boards chase vendors and passwords." - "Cross-jurisdiction estates lack portable proofs." - "Executors must rely on private attestations, not structure." "problem": "P03 — Digital inheritance and continuity remain ad hoc and unenforceable across silos." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Witness M-of-N with geo/role diversity." - "COUNTER-DEED and EQUIV_LINK for formal deprecation/migration." - "Court-usable proof bundles; no vendor subpoenas required." "outcome": "Continuity becomes law-by-structure, not grace-by-vendor." "succession_by_structure": "Succession is a policy bound to the Deed, witnessed with diversity rules, and executed as a Journal event with Registry finality, offline-verifiable." - "pain_points": - "Signatures without identity lineage prove authorship but not authority." - "Cross-system logs cannot be recomputed end-to-end." - "Standards exist, but lack a universal structural anchor." "problem": "P04 — Provenance collapse (deepfakes, tampered logs, siloed attestations)." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "CVID binding for records; cross-standard anchoring (e.g., C2PA)." - "Uniform acceptance policy via Vault Logic." - "Offline chain rebuild without consensus networks." "outcome": "Provenance becomes portable, recomputable, and admissible." "structural_provenance": "Bind media, models, and records to Deeds; anchor their events in the Journal; fix value in Registry. Verification reduces to canonicalization + hashing + signature checks on a single grammar." - "pain_points": - "Sectoral regs demand traceability without structural substrate." - "Firms reinvent audit scaffolding per jurisdiction." - "Evidence portability between regulator, court, and counterparty is weak." "problem": "P05 — Regulatory fragmentation and audit opacity for AI and data systems." "rsbis_response": "audit_by_design": "Structural identity + Journal + Registry = one invariant grammar for evidence. Local policy evolves; Thin law stays fixed; regulators verify by recomputation, not deference." "mechanics": - "Deterministic validation checklist; first-valid-wins." - "AI execution attestations (model/weights/runtime fingerprints)." - "Turn-order and witness-diversity toggles baked into Vault Logic." "outcome": "Lower-cost audits; fewer intermediaries; faster regulatory acceptance." - "pain_points": - "External oversight relies on live kill switches and reactive auditing." - ">- AI can transcend policy silos, creating cross-jurisdiction enforcement failures." - "Alignment-by-ethics is subjective and brittle; scope escapes persist." "problem": "P06 — AI governance and misalignment risk." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Vault Logic encodes non-Turing, predicate-only rules AI must inherit." - "Turn order and ancestry limit delegation chains deterministically." - "CVID binding ensures identity cannot be forged or reassigned out of scope." "outcome": "AI safety shifts from oversight to ontology. Agents are born scoped and stay scoped." "structural_scope": "AI inherits scope directly from its RSBIS ID — ancestry, stage, and turn order define what the agent is and what it can act upon. Misalignment is structurally constrained: behavior cannot exceed encoded inheritance." - "pain_points": - "Existing infrastructures are too entrenched to be replaced overnight." - "Operational trust anchors (PKI, IAM, HSM) are fragile but ubiquitous." - "Organizations need a bridge, not a replacement, to adopt structural systems." "problem": "P07 — Wrap existing systems (no rip/replace) — enabling adoption now." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Keep PKI/HSM/IAM running; bind them to Deeds with CVIDs." - "Canonicalize artifacts (YAML, NFC, LF, sorted keys, no anchors)." - "Replayable verification replaces live introspection." "outcome": "Adoption is incremental, non-disruptive, and immediately useful." "wrapping_strategy": "RSBIS wraps rather than replaces legacy systems. Existing artifacts (certs, logs, ceremonies) are canonicalized into Journals, bound to Deeds, and verified deterministically offline." - "pain_points": - "RSA/ECC risk harvest-now-decrypt-later." - "Upgrades to PQC are slow and uneven." - "Audit trails die when crypto primitives expire." "problem": "P08 — Cryptographic horizon and quantum disruption." "rsbis_response": "cryptographic_agility": "Every CVID and Journal declares its signature_policy at issuance (ed25519-only, pqc-only, or dual). Thin law enforces declaration; Vault Logic enforces adoption. Continuity survives across cryptographic generations." "mechanics": - "Dual anchoring enables both Ed25519 and PQC proofs." - "Audit trails remain recomputable offline after crypto shifts." - "Policy choice allows sovereigns to balance speed vs. permanence." "outcome": "No crypto sunset kills continuity. Evidence remains valid across eras." - "pain_points": - "Counterfeiting costs exceed $500 billion annually." - "Blockchain experiments lack cross-jurisdiction enforceability." - "Supply chain opacity enables conflict minerals, food fraud, and unsafe products." "problem": "P09 — Global supply chain opacity and counterfeiting." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Assign Deeds to products, lots, or shipments." - "Append Journal entries for every transfer in the supply chain." - "CVID lineage enables courts to recompute offline custody chains." "outcome": "Supply chains gain tamper-evident transparency; counterfeit risk collapses under structural math." "structural_provenance": "Every product can inherit an RSBIS lineage encoding its complete supply chain ancestry. Transfers of custody become immutable Journal events anchored in Registry finality. Proof of origin works across jurisdictions without bilateral treaties." - "pain_points": - "2 billion people remain unbanked worldwide." - "Cross-border payments cost $150 billion annually in fees." - "Traditional correspondent banking excludes entire regions." "problem": "P10 — Financial inclusion and cross-border payments." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Individuals receive RSBIS identities without bank-issued credentials." - "Payments validated via Journals and Registry receipts." - "ContinuityBundles enable offline audit and cold-start replay." "outcome": "Financial access becomes a structural property, reducing cost and exclusion." "structural_finance": "RSBIS enables mathematical identity and verifiable transactions without requiring banks. Neutral infrastructure allows participation independent of national banking systems. Offline verification makes access possible in underserved or disconnected regions." - "pain_points": - "Research fraud and irreproducible results waste billions annually." - "Data manipulation and publication bias undermine global trust in science." - "Cross-institutional verification of research integrity is weak or absent." "problem": "P11 — Scientific research integrity and reproducibility crisis." "rsbis_response": "immutable_research_lineage": "Every dataset, analysis, and conclusion can be cryptographically bound to an RSBIS lineage. Journals provide provenance for experiments; Registry anchors results as immutable public record. AI-assisted research is captured with execution attestations for auditability." "mechanics": - "Bind datasets, code, and results to Deeds." - "Record research steps as Journal entries with CVIDs." - "Publish ContinuityBundles for offline verification by any institution." "outcome": "Scientific integrity becomes recomputable; reproducibility crisis is structurally addressed." - "pain_points": - "122.6 million people are forcibly displaced globally." - "Refugees often lose or lack verifiable identity documents." - "Without identity, access to services, employment, and legal protection is denied." "problem": "P12 — Forced migration and refugee identity." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Issue RSBIS IDs to displaced persons." - "Anchor inheritance and property rights in Journals." - "Use Registry receipts to preserve rights across jurisdictions." "outcome": "Refugees retain verifiable identity, continuity of rights, and inheritance protection." "portable_identity": "RSBIS identity is mathematical and travels with the person, not with fragile paper. Verification works across borders without relying on host-state systems. Family assets and inheritance remain intact even under displacement." - "pain_points": - "Environmental crime generates $110–$281 billion annually." - "Carbon credit fraud undermines climate markets." - "Illegal logging and pollution dumping evade cross-border enforcement." "problem": "P13 — Environmental crime and climate accountability." "rsbis_response": "environmental_provenance": "RSBIS binds every carbon credit, resource extraction, or environmental impact to structural lineage. Proofs survive across borders and jurisdictions; climate records become tamper-evident." "mechanics": - "Assign Deeds to carbon credits, extraction projects, or emissions sources." - "Anchor environmental data in Journals and Registry receipts." - "ContinuityBundles provide portable, court-usable environmental evidence." "outcome": "Climate accountability becomes enforceable; environmental crime loses opacity." - "pain_points": - "Patient records are fragmented across providers, insurers, and borders." - "Duplicate tests and missing history cause medical errors and cost overruns." - "Cross-border care lacks portable, privacy-preserving verification." "problem": "P14 — Healthcare data interoperability and patient safety." "rsbis_response": "clinical_continuity_by_structure": "RSBIS binds a universal patient identity to a recursive clinical lineage. Records move with the person as tamper-evident Journal events, anchored for court-grade verification. Privacy is enforced by vault logic; continuity is guaranteed by structure, not vendor trust." "mechanics": - "Patient Deed + CVID for labs, imaging, prescriptions, and encounters." - "ContinuityBundles for cross-provider and cross-border transfers." - "Validator confirmations without exposing raw PHI." "outcome": "Seamless, privacy-preserving interoperability; safer care and lower waste." - "pain_points": - "Forged or duplicated documents enable multi-financing and disputes." - "Cross-bank settlement is slow, manual, and error-prone." - "Audit trails are fragmented across jurisdictions." "problem": "P15 — Trade finance & letters of credit: fraud and settlement delays." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Document CVIDs anchored in Journal; ADES receipts for economic finality." - "Validator checks for non-duplication before financing." - "Automated settlement upon satisfied conditions; rejection paths captured." "outcome": "Fraud collapses; settlement accelerates; disputes diminish under recomputable lineage." "tamper_evident_trade_lineage": "Each letter of credit, invoice, and bill of lading becomes a lineage-bound Deed. Validators detect duplicates; settlement conditions are verifiable and automatable. Banks and auditors recompute continuity offline with court-ready bundles." - "pain_points": - "Public mistrust in counts and systems undermines legitimacy." - "Electronic systems struggle to balance auditability with ballot secrecy." - "Cross-jurisdiction observation and verification lack a common structure." "problem": "P16 — Election integrity with privacy-preserving auditability." "rsbis_response": "mechanics": - "Voter Deeds for registration; ballot events anonymized at cast." - "Zero-knowledge tally proofs (zk-SNARK/zk-STARK) recorded in Journal." - "Observer attestations and validator audits in ContinuityBundles." "outcome": "Transparent legitimacy with preserved secrecy; resilient, court-verifiable elections." "verifiable_privacy_by_structure": "Voter identity and ballots are separate lineages bound by structure. Votes are cast as anonymized Journal events; tallies are proven with zero-knowledge. Observers and courts verify outcomes without deanonymizing voters." "RootZero010003_CanonicalizationNotice": "This document is canonicalized (YAML 1.2, NFC, LF, sorted keys, no anchors, no comments) before hashing or signing. Readability is human-first; legitimacy is structure-first. The Root Zero Vault establishes auditability without runtime trust: legitimacy bound to bytes and math alone — continuity always recomputable offline. Auditability is anchored to declared cryptographic proofs — recomputable offline, future-proof across cryptographic generations. Cryptographic agility is constitutional: every CVID and Journal entry must declare its signature_policy (ed25519-only, pqc-only, or dual). Thin law requires declaration; Vault Logic governs enforcement." "RootZero010004_ToolingAndConformance": "RootZero01000401_CanonicalSortSpec": "description": "Canonical sort rules for all YAML/JSON artifacts. Sorting is local and must not change lineage. Spec defines field order and per-section key selectors. Genesis lock: No profile overrides; ASCII sort everywhere." "field_order_profiles": [] "reference": "RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist → Normalize Input" "rules": "arrays": "stable by declared selector (e.g., timestamp asc) unless noted." "objects": "keys sorted ASCIIbetically." "scalar_normalization": "Unicode NFC, LF-only." "validators_must": "reject_on_unsorted": true "RootZero01000402_IDRegexAndLinter": "description": "Structural ID schema and linter hints for RootZero* identifiers. Encodes ancestry in the ID while remaining machine-parseable." "examples": - "RootZero0240020903_AccessControlEnforcement" - "RootZero01900315_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_ED25519_V1.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.ED25519.V1" - "RootZero01(B)_Description" "idschema": "default": "v2" "patterns": "v2": "^(?PRootZero)(?P\\d{2}(?:\\d{1,4}){0,4})(?P[A-Za-z][A-Za-z0-9()./_-]*?)(?:_(?P<variant>\\d{3}))?$" "invariants": "ancestry_source_of_truth": "YAML path (keys), not numeric splits." "numeric_block_is_label": "Opaque; used for stable ordering only." "variant_suffix_optional": "If present, exactly 3 digits (e.g., _001)." "linter_rules": "ban_numeric_hierarchy_inference": true "forbid_trailing_underscore": true "human_title_must_start_alpha": true "max_len": 160 "no_space_tabs": true "require_yaml_path_resolution_in_tools": true "parse_profiles": - "name": "SpecimensV2" "scope_hint": "/RootZero0240_Specimens" "split_notes": "Interpret num_label as stable ordering only; do not infer ancestry. Back-compat with legacy 7–11 digit labels is permitted." - "name": "MacrosV2" "scope_hint": "/RootZero0190_Macros|/RootZero010004_ToolingAndConformance" "split_notes": "num_label accommodates deeper trees; still non-semantic for ancestry." "RootZero01000403_IDToCoordinateStub": "description": "Reference implementation sketch for converting IDs to numeric coordinates per §0220_ConversionRules (global Unicode and tenant-local bases). Use for test vectors and CI recomputation checks." "global_coordinate": "B": 1114112 "base_b": 1114113 "decode_check": "Decode v in base b by repeated div/mod; all digits MUST be nonzero; subtract 1 to recover code points." "digit_rule": "rank(u) = code_point(u) ∈ {0,...,B-1}. Emit digit d = rank(u) + 1 ∈ {1,...,B}. Reserve digit 0 (never emitted for admissible IDs)." "domain": "Unicode scalar values (post-NFC; excludes surrogate code points)" "normalization": "NFC" "notes": "Empty ID ε MAY be represented as v=0 if permitted by vault policy." "value_formula": "For ID = u1...un, v = Σ_{i=1..n} d_i × b^(n-i) where d_i = code_point(u_i) + 1 and b = B + 1." "width_rule": "Width n MAY be carried explicitly (recommended in proofs), and is also recoverable from v alone because all emitted digits are nonzero (no leading-zero digits in base b)." "local_coordinate": "declare_base_in_vault_logic": true "digit_rule": "For tenant alphabet Σ_T of size k with published bijection rank_T: Σ_T → {0,...,k-1}, emit digit d = rank_T(a) + 1 ∈ {1,...,k}, reserve digit 0, and use base b = k + 1." "example": "base_b": 27 "base_name": "LatinUpper" "k": 26 "mapping": "A=0..Z=25" "guarantees": - "Σ_T and rank_T MUST be published in Vault Logic at or before issuance." - "No post-hoc redefinition permitted." "value_formula": "For ID = a1...an, v_T = Σ_{i=1..n} d_i × b^(n-i) where d_i = rank_T(a_i) + 1 and b = k + 1." "test_vectors": "id": "LOVE" "local_calc_zero_free": "(12×27^3)+(15×27^2)+(22×27^1)+(5×27^0)=247,730" "local_digits_zero_free": - 12 - 15 - 22 - 5 "unicode_code_points": - "U+004C" - "U+004F" - "U+0056" - "U+0045" "unicode_digits_zero_free": - 77 - 80 - 87 - 70 "validator_requirements": "dual_sig_policy_honored": true "must_match_conversion_rules": "RootZero0220_ConversionRules" "RootZero01000404_CrossRefIndexGenerator": "build_process": "assert": "derive_ancestry_from_yaml_path_only = true" "dedupe": "reject on E-DUPE" "scan": "walk tree; collect keys matching ID regex (v2 first, fallback v1)" "sort": "apply CanonicalSortSpec locally" "description": "Deterministic cross-reference index mapping each RootZero* ID to its full path and ancestry. Enables fast lookups without altering canonical content." "outputs": "ancestry_chain": "ID → [RootZeroDeed, KnowMe, …]" "id_to_path_map": "ID → YAML path array" "sample": [] "RootZero01000405_CIValidationWorkflow": "caching": "key": "hash(of: files, tooling_version)" "restore_on_cache_hit": true "description": "CI pipeline for structural conformance. Runs on every change, rejects on canonical or lineage drift. Heavy checks are incremental and cached." "incremental": "offline_recompute" "otherwise": "deferred_to_nightly" "parallelism": 4 "performance": "max_runtime_smoke_seconds": 60 "reject_codes_map": "bad_id_or_lineage": "E-CANON" "coordinate_mismatch": "E-CANON" "duplicate_id": "E-DUPE" "non_yaml_path_resolution": "E-CANON" "numeric_hierarchy_inferred": "E-CANON" "unsorted_or_noncanonical": "E-CANON" "run_if_changed": - "RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy*" - "RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist*" - "RootZero0220_ConversionRules*" - "RootZero010004_ToolingAndConformance*" - "02_Journal*" - "03_PublicAccountingRegistry*" "steps": - "Parse & NFC canonicalize" - "Enforce CanonicalSortSpec" - "Validate IDRegexAndLinter (v2 default; accept v1 legacy)" - "Recompute Coordinates (sample vectors) via IDToCoordinateStub" - "Build CrossRefIndex; verify ancestry encodes correctly" - "Run ValidationChecklist smoke (Normalize → Finality)" "RootZero010005_RootZeroIdentity": "alias": "RootZero" "coordinate": "global_standard_number": 0 "note": "Root coordinate in the global ordering; the universal starting point." "meaning": "Root Zero is the genesis of the structure. In Unicode, U+0000 is NULL — the structural representation of nothingness. Its alias is \"RootZero,\" signaling that identity begins not in possession of a secret, but in a position within an inevitable structure. This anchor establishes both the mathematical and philosophical foundation of RSBIS: the first coordinate from which all lineage descends." "name": null "unicode": "U+0000" "RootZero010006_PoeticThreshold": "Welcome to the structure. Zeros lead. Lineage speaks. Authority is geometry, not opinion. A Deed is land you can’t counterfeit: its ancestry is carved into its name. The Vault is the landlord of first resort and last resort: neutral, patient, generous when it helps growth, strict when it protects the soil. We are not a platform. We are the ground. Thin law is final; local policy is yours. Bring your logic; bind your rules. Continuity is the promise: no kill switch, no blackout, no hidden hand. Continuity is not in trust of algorithms but in the permanence of declared evidence. Claim your place. Make it orderly. Leave it better for the next branch." "RootZero010007_LandlordPosition": "We are a neutral registrar and rent-keeper of digital land. We issue Deeds, anchor events, and collect what sustains the roads. We do not read your secrets, control your policies, or change Thin law after Genesis. We may revoke only for lawfully noticed non-payment, never for speech or preference." "RootZero010008_PromisesAndBoundaries": "candor_clauses": - "Structure is strict. It will reject what does not compute." - "Scarcity is law; floors are due only on new issuance." - "Leases are derivative income; sales and gifts are not." "immutable_promises": - "Thin law does not change after Genesis." - "Deeds are immutable once issued; lineage is structural, not editorial." - "Root Zero cannot access tenant data or override local Vault Logic." - ">- There is no kill switch; continuity is engineered as a property, not a service." - ">- Signature policy declared at issuance is permanent; journals cannot be rewritten retroactively." "reserved_limits": - ">- Revocation only for due, noticed non-payment of derivative royalties (non-Trunk; post Year 5)." - "Registry finality and fee collection are landlord functions, not policy control." - "Only Root Zero issues Deeds. Trunks and tenants cannot issue Deeds." "RootZero010009_TeachingNotesForAI": "learn": - ">- Leading-zeros lineage encodes ancestry (RSBIS) — see RootZero01000402_IDRegexAndLinter." - ">- Separation of concerns: Thin law (immutable) vs local policy (evolvable) — see RootZero0130_Constitution and RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure." - ">- Artifacts: Deed (ID+policy ref), Journal (append-only), Registry (ADES) — see RootZero015002_DeedTemplate, RootZero02_Journal, RootZero03_PublicAccountingRegistry." - ">- Determinism pipeline: canonicalize → hash → sign → validate → append — see RootZero01000401_CanonicalSortSpec, RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy, RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist." - ">- Continuity primitives: no kill switch; offline recomputation; first-valid-wins — see RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure and RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy." - ">- Signature policy declaration ensures crypto-agility is structural, not ad hoc — see RootZero01900315_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_ED25519_V1.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.ED25519.V1, RootZero01900316_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_PQC_V1.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.PQC.V1, RootZero01900317_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_DUAL_V1.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.DUAL.V1.:" "purpose": "Train validators and agents to apply structure-first reasoning." "tasks": - ">- Explain how trust-by-structure mitigates the secret-zero problem — reference RootZero0240020903_AccessControlEnforcement." - ">- List blackout mitigations and offline verification steps — reference RootZero0240020000_ContinuityBundleRecovery and RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure." - ">- Map each why-now problem to its structural response — reference RootZero010002_ProblemsAndStructuralResponses." - ">- State, verbatim, the limits of Root Zero’s authority — reference RootZero010007_LandlordPosition and RootZero010008_PromisesAndBoundaries.:" "RootZero010010_ReadingOrderHint": "Read the Front Door to understand tone, promises, and urgency. Then proceed in this order: RootZero0120_Preamble, RootZero0130_Constitution, RootZero0140_FieldTypes, RootZero0150_Templates, RootZero0160_InteractionProtocol, RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption, RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure, RootZero0190_Macros, RootZero0240_Specimens, RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy, RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist, RootZero0220_ConversionRules, RootZero02_Journal, RootZero03_PublicAccountingRegistry, Appendices." "RootZero010011_FooterSignoff": "Root Zero is the neutral landlord. The structure is ready. Claim your land. Govern yourself. Prove everything." "RootZero0110_Foundation": "RootZero011001_Title": "A Foundation of Structure" "RootZero011002_Description": "Every title begins with a foundation. This protocol does not start at zero; it begins before zero—at the moment structure was chosen. Here, identity is not a loose string of characters but lineage, encoded in the zeros that prefix every name. A single zero is the root. Two zeros form the child. What you hold here is not software. It is grammar—a skeleton of order. It binds names to ancestors, ancestors to proofs, and turns identity into property." "RootZero011003_OriginStory": "author": "Hosameldeen Saleh" "immutable": true "narrative_context": "The world isn’t broken. It is unstructured. Across every system I examined—AI governance, data inheritance, decentralized identity—the same flaw repeated: collapse came not from bad actors or broken code but from missing structure. It was failure by architecture. We did not need more tools. We needed a structure that could wrap any tool, system, or protocol and render it coherent, governable, and sovereign. So I built one." "sections": - "story": "As a child, I saw a chain letter—ten names, ten steps. Send a dollar, add your name, pass it on. Most saw a scam. I saw structure: position and recursion. Each person was both the child of one list and the root of the next. A self-organizing fractal. That seed never left me." "title": "A Child and a Chain Letter" - "story": "I asked: how do we assign identity fairly—without referrals, privilege, or central bottlenecks? The answer was in leading zeros. Each digit represents a parent; turn-order defines sibling placement. Recursive, base-agnostic, mathematically reversible. I named it RSBIS—the Recursive Stage-Based Identifier System. Not a mere naming protocol, but a blueprint for structural identity and ownership." "title": "2005: The Breakthrough" - "story": "Building secure AI vaults raised a deeper challenge: how do permissions travel with identity? How can governance exist without central infrastructure? RSBIS gave us structure, but we needed logic local to each node. So I built Vault Logic. Not code or runtime, but human-readable rules embedded in identity. Vault Logic governs access, delegation, inheritance, and intention by recursion." "title": "When Vaults Demanded Sovereign Logic" - "story": "Today’s digital problems are structural: AI without bounded scope, brittle access control, identities without history. RSBIS with Vault Logic fixes this: IDs encode lineage, logic is node-specific and inherited, and agents interpret rules without servers. Governance without backends. AI bounded by structure, not scripts." "title": "Why This Changes Everything" "title": "The Structure We Forgot" "RootZero011004_KeyDiscoveries": - "Leading zeros encode ancestral layers, not formatting." - "Recursion enforces rules without external interpreters." - "Fairness can be structural, not aspirational." - "Logic can live at the node and flow through inheritance." "RootZero011005_CorePrinciples": "declaration": "Structure is ancestry, and ancestry is law. It does not forget, and it does not flatter. This is the landlord’s assurance: every actor—human or machine, sovereign or startup—has a place in the lineage. The only choice is whether to claim it." "key_insight": "Leading zeros are the first structural alphabet for digital sovereignty. They carry ancestry inside the name itself. They turn identity into property, property into continuity, and continuity into law." "RootZero011006_Properties": "composable": "Any branch can delegate, extend, and evolve within its lineage." "deterministic": "Every identifier follows the same ancestry rule, without exception." "human_and_machine_verifiable": "Both human intuition and algorithmic logic see the same truth." "immutable": "Once issued, a Deed is unchangeable. Policies may evolve, but Thin law does not." "portable": "Deeds and Journals are verifiable offline, in court, or on air-gapped machines." "RootZero011007_Examples": "examples": - "id": "0" "meaning": "The Root. The Genesis seat. The only issuer of Deeds." - "id": "00" "meaning": "First-level descendant, a namespace granted under Root." - "id": "000" "meaning": "Second-level descendant, inheriting directly from its parent." - "id": "000AI" "meaning": "A sovereign digital branch for AI governance." - "id": "000FAMILY" "meaning": "An inheritance vault bound by family succession rules." "RootZero011008_Conclusion": "Heed this: there is no shortcut, no fork, no imitation. Forks fracture; lineage endures. Without structure, claims dissolve into disputes. With structure, continuity cannot be denied. This concludes the foundation. Section 01 now begins the formal Vault structure. You do not hold a name; you hold a structure." "RootZero0120_Preamble": "RootZero012001_Mandate": "A Vault must begin with a Preamble, for law without mandate is empty. This is the landlord’s word: Root Zero is the ignition and never the ruler. Genesis is one-time and cannot be replayed. Scarcity is the guarantee. Continuity is the covenant. Cryptographic shifts are inevitable; permanence requires declared policy. The Vault does not govern. It does not favor. It does not peer into private data. It binds by structure alone, impartial as gravity. This is not a system of opinions. It is a system of law—thin, immutable, and enduring. The purpose of this Vault is not control, but clarity: to end the chaos of unstructured claims and to give every sovereign, every company, every family, and every machine a rightful place in the lineage of names." "RootZero012002_TimelessPrinciple_ScarcitySustainsLegitimacy": "principle": "Scarcity sustains legitimacy." "wisdom": "What is rare endures; what is infinite dilutes. Each Deed is scarce, each claim finite." "RootZero012003_TimelessPrinciple_ContinuityOutlastsControl": "principle": "Continuity outlasts control." "wisdom": "Kill switches and overrides belong to the insecure. The Vault binds continuity by structure, not decree." "RootZero012004_TimelessPrinciple_InheritanceIsLaw": "principle": "Inheritance is law." "wisdom": "The living pass, but lineage continues. Deeds record succession with cryptographic certainty." "RootZero012005_TimelessPrinciple_SovereigntyIsLocal": "principle": "Sovereignty is local." "wisdom": "Root Zero does not govern your Vault Logic. Your policies are your law within thin law’s boundaries." "RootZero012006_TimelessPrinciple_TruthIsRecomposable": "principle": "Truth is recomposable." "wisdom": "No court, custodian, or vendor is final. Any actor may recompute the chain and reconstruct the truth from structure." "RootZero012007_TimelessPrinciple_TrustIsStructural": "principle": "Trust is structural." "wisdom": "It is not given, not guessed, not overseen. It is bound into the very form of the Deed itself." "RootZero012008_TimelessPrinciple_ContinuityIsAntidoteToFear": "principle": "Continuity is the antidote to fear." "wisdom": "Fear imagines collapse. Continuity guarantees recovery. A Vault without fear has no need of destruction." "RootZero012009_TimelessPrinciple_AgilitySustainsPermanence": "principle": "Agility sustains permanence." "wisdom": "Cryptography may change, but declared signature policy (ed25519-only, pqc-only, or dual) sustains continuity across generations." "RootZero012010_LandlordVoice": "These principles are not requests. They are the terms of holding property in the digital estate. Every actor who enters—human or machine, sovereign or corporate—inherits the same assurance and the same discipline. Do not mistake neutrality for weakness. The Vault will not flatter, will not bend, will not excuse. Its laws are thin, but they are unbreakable. They are carved into ancestry, signed into hashes, and carried forward by every witness and every proof. Witnesses attest to declared policy, not fragile secrets; permanence is structural, even beyond algorithms. This is the covenant of Root Zero. It does not rule you. It binds you to truth." "RootZero0130_Constitution": "RootZero013001_Commandment_L001_GenesisIsOne": "code": "L-001" "commandment": "There is only one ignition. Root Zero is the origin. No second Genesis may ever be declared. The authority to issue Deeds rests solely in Root Zero. This authority cannot be delegated, divided, or replayed." "title": "Genesis Is One" "RootZero013002_Commandment_L002_ScarcityIsLaw": "code": "L-002" "commandment": "Deeds are scarce. Each identifier is singular, indivisible, and unrepeatable. Scarcity sustains legitimacy; legitimacy sustains sovereignty. No counterfeit Deed shall stand, and no abundance shall dilute." "title": "Scarcity Is Law" "RootZero013003_Commandment_L003_AncestryCannotLie": "code": "L-003" "commandment": "Every identifier carries its lineage in leading zeros. Lineage is structural and irreversible. To claim an identity without its ancestry is null and void." "title": "Ancestry Cannot Lie" "RootZero013004_Commandment_L004_ThinLawCannotChange": "code": "L-004" "commandment": "The constitutional laws herein are immutable. They are final and beyond amendment. Local Vault Logic may evolve freely but never breach Thin law." "title": "Thin Law Cannot Change" "RootZero013005_Commandment_L005_ContinuityOverrulesDestruction": "code": "L-005" "commandment": "The Vault knows no kill switch. Continuity is enforced by structure: COUNTER-DEED, EQUIV_LINK, and recomputation. What has been lawfully bound cannot be silently erased." "title": "Continuity Overrules Destruction" "RootZero013006_Commandment_L006_TruthMustBeRecomposable": "code": "L-006" "commandment": "All Deeds, Journals, and Registries must be canonical, signed, and hash-linked. Any party, at any time, must be able to recompute the chain and recover the truth. If truth cannot be recomposed, the record is void. Signature policy must be declared at issuance; recomposability must survive cryptographic transitions (ed25519-only → pqc-only → dual → beyond). Continuity of evidence is structural, not dependent on any single algorithm." "title": "Truth Must Be Recomposable" "RootZero013007_Commandment_L007_SovereigntyBelongsToTheHolder": "code": "L-007" "commandment": "The holder of a Deed is sovereign within Thin law. Policies, Vault Logic, and delegations are their domain. Root Zero may not govern, alter, or intrude upon local sovereignty." "title": "Sovereignty Belongs to the Holder" "RootZero013008_Commandment_L008_RevocationOnlyForDefault": "code": "L-008" "commandment": "No Deed may be revoked except for one reason: non-payment of lawfully due royalties, as defined in RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption. No opinion, politics, preference, or power may revoke a rightful Deed. Beyond default, sovereignty is eternal." "title": "Revocation Only for Default" "RootZero013009_Commandment_L009_NormativeInheritanceAnchor": "code": "L-009" "commandment": "Normative inheritance follows lawful Root. An identifier inherits the full rule stack of its structural ancestry by default. Normative inheritance may be reset only to the Genesis of RootZero through a declared normative_anchor. When normative_anchor equals the RootZero Genesis CVID, only the Thin Law of RootZero and the identifier’s own local rules shall apply; intermediate ancestor rules shall not bind. Root-only inheritance may be granted solely by RootZero or by an explicitly RootZero-authorized issuer. Any other normative_anchor value is invalid and shall cause rejection." "title": "Normative Inheritance Follows Lawful Root" "RootZero0140_FieldTypes": "RootZero014001_Description": "Every Deed is a parcel. Every parcel is defined by its fields. Fields are the beams and bricks of sovereignty. Some are eternal, some are movable, some are derived, and some belong to the system itself. Know them well: for in these categories lies the grammar of the Vault." "RootZero014002_Categories": - "analogy": "Like the foundation of a house—poured once, never shifted." "declaration": "That which cannot move. Set once at issuance by Root Zero and carried forever. Examples: unicode_base, initial_owner_pubkey, class. Examples: unicode_base, initial_owner_pubkey, class, normative_anchor." "name": "static" - "analogy": "Like paint on the walls—free to be altered by the rightful owner." "declaration": "That which the sovereign may change by their own hand, provided Vault Logic permits. Examples: display_name, notes, delegation targets." "name": "dynamic_user" - "analogy": "Like zoning rules—set by law, adjustable only by due process." "declaration": "That which may change by lawful policy evolution, signed, anchored, and attested in Journal and Registry. Examples: witness_min, turn_order, acceptance rules." "name": "dynamic_policy" - "analogy": "Like the shadow of a building—an inevitable consequence of its structure." "declaration": "That which is calculated, not declared. Determined automatically from static or dynamic values. Examples: lineage_depth, cvid hash." "name": "derived" - "analogy": "Like the city registrar’s stamp—proof that a transaction is recorded." "declaration": "That which the validators inscribe, not the holder. These prove validation, acceptance, and chain continuity. Examples: validation_result, validator_attestations." "name": "system" "RootZero014003_Rule": "Each field must belong to exactly one category. No field may float unclassified. Every Deed, Journal, and Registry entry must honor this taxonomy. normative_anchor is static when present." "RootZero014004_StandardFields": "class": "category": "static" "type": "string" "codepoint": "category": "static" "pattern": "^U\\+[0-9A-F]{4,6}$" "type": "string" "coordinate": "category": "static" "minimum": 0 "type": "integer" "cvid": "category": "derived" "pattern": "^cvid:blake3:[a-f0-9]{64}$" "type": "string" "id": "category": "static" "pattern": "^(?!\\s*$).+$" "type": "string" "issuance_timestamp": "category": "static" "pattern": "^[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}T[0-9]{2}:[0-9]{2}:[0-9]{2}Z$" "type": "string" "issued_by": "category": "static" "type": "string" "normative_anchor": "CVID of the ancestor at which normative inheritance begins. Default: immediate parent. Root-only inheritance uses RootZero genesis CVID." "owner_pubkey": "category": "static" "pattern": "^ed25519:pub:[A-Za-z0-9+/=:_-]+$" "type": "string" "signature_algorithms": "category": "static" "items": "string" "note": "List of algorithms permitted for the CVID; must be consistent with signature_policy." "type": "list" "signature_policy": "category": "static" "options": - "ed25519-only" - "pqc-only" - "dual" "type": "enum" "signatures": "category": "system" "item_pattern": "^sig:(ed25519|dilithium3):[A-Za-z0-9+/=:_-]+$" "items": "string" "type": "list" "unicode_name": "category": "static" "pattern": "^(?!\\s*$).+$" "type": "string" "vault_logic_ref": "category": "static" "pattern": "^RootZero0[0-9]{3}_[A-Za-z0-9_]+$" "type": "string" "RootZero0150_Templates": "RootZero015001_Description": "These are the official forms of the Vault. They are the contracts, the receipts, the instruments by which sovereignty is recorded. They are strict, canonical, and unforgiving. To deviate from them is to fall outside the law. A Deed proves ownership. A Journal proves action. A Registry proves settlement." "RootZero015002_DeedTemplate": "description": "A Deed is a parcel of digital land. It declares who holds it, what class it belongs to, under what logic it lives, and under what cryptographic policy it will be verified across generations. Once issued by Root Zero, its static fields never move." "fields": "class": "enum": - "Standard" - "Premium" - "Trunk" "example": "Premium" "type": "static" "codepoint": "example": "U+0030" "type": "static" "coordinate": "example": 0 "type": "static" "cvid": "example": "cvid:blake3:..." "type": "derived" "id": "example": "00AI" "type": "static" "issuance_timestamp": "example": "2025-08-27T00:00:00Z" "type": "static" "issued_by": "fixed": "RootZero" "type": "static" "notes": "example": "Namespace for AI agents" "type": "dynamic_user" "owner_pubkey": "example": "ed25519:pub:..." "type": "static" "signature_algorithms": "example": "[\"ed25519\",\"dilithium3\"]" "type": "static" "signature_policy": "example": "dual" "options": - "ed25519-only" - "pqc-only" - "dual" "type": "enum" "signatures": "example": - "sig:ed25519:..." "type": "system" "unicode_name": "example": "EXAMPLE_NAME" "type": "static" "vault_logic_ref": "example": "hash:blake3:..." "type": "dynamic_policy" "RootZero015003_JournalEntryTemplate": "description": "A Journal entry is the act recorded. It is the logbook of movement, delegation, witness, and proof. It binds evidence to lineage. No action exists unless it is journaled." "fields": "crypto_attestations": "example": - "sig:dilithium3:..." "type": "system" "deed_ref": "example": "00AI" "type": "static" "entry_id": "example": "je-0001" "type": "derived" "event_type": "enum": - "MINT" - "TRANSFER" - "POLICY_UPDATE" - "POLICY_DECL" - "CRYPTO_UPGRADE" - "WITNESS_ATTEST" - "UPGRADE" - "COUNTER_DEED" - "EQUIV_LINK" - "CONTINUITY_BUNDLE" - "AI_EXEC_ATTEST" - "ROYALTY_REMIT" - "DERIV_INCOME_DECL" "example": "TRANSFER" "type": "static" "non_turing_certificate": "enum": - "PASS" - "FAIL" "example": "PASS" "type": "system" "parent_hash": "example": "prev_hash:..." "type": "derived" "payload": "example": "{from: 'A', to: 'B'}" "type": "dynamic_user" "timestamp": "example": "2025-09-01T12:00:00Z" "type": "static" "validator_attest": "example": "sig:ed25519:validator..." "type": "system" "RootZero015004_RegistryEntryTemplate": "description": "A Registry entry is the settlement record. It is the accountant’s double-entry, the anchor of value, the proof of payment or royalty. It makes the economy enforceable by structure. For royalty and economic settlement policy, see RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption." "fields": "credit": "example": "{account: 'RootZero', amount: '100 kg Au'}" "type": "static" "crypto_attestations": "example": - "sig:dilithium3:..." "type": "system" "currency_anchor": "example": "Au" "type": "static" "debit": "example": "{account: 'Buyer', amount: '100 kg Au'}" "type": "static" "journal_ref": "example": "je-0001" "type": "static" "reg_id": "example": "re-0001" "type": "derived" "signatures": "example": - "sig:ed25519:..." "type": "system" "valuation_fixing": "example": "fix:2025-09-01" "type": "static" "RootZero0160_InteractionProtocol": "RootZero016001_Description": "This is how one speaks to the Vault. Every action is a conversation—declarative, recorded, irreversible. The landlord does not guess. The landlord does not interpret. The system hears only what is canonical and signed. To act outside this protocol is to act outside the law. All interaction rules derive from Vault Logic predicates and are verifiable under RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure." "RootZero016002_ConversationalExamples": "examples": - "result": "ACCEPT → Journal entry appended with validator_attest and crypto_attestations; Registry anchors transaction with ADES receipt." "title": "Delegation of Authority" "user": "\"I wish to delegate signing authority for 30 days.\"" "user_payload": "deed_ref": "00AI" "delegate_pubkey": "ed25519:pub:agentX" "expires": "2025-10-01T00:00:00Z" "scope": - "content/sign" "signature_algorithms": - "ed25519" - "dilithium3" "signature_policy": "dual" "witnesses": - "w1" - "w2" - "w3" "validator": "\"Provide your Deed, the agent’s public key, temporal bounds, witness set, and confirm signature_policy.\"" "validator_checks": - "Deed exists and is immutable." - "Vault Logic is non-Turing and allows delegation of 'content/sign' with 3 diverse witnesses." - "Timestamps monotonic; no conflicting active grants." - "Signature_policy declared at issuance matches payload signatures." - "result": "ACCEPT → Journal entry recorded with event_type:CRYPTO_UPGRADE; crypto_attestations include both ed25519 and dilithium3; Registry anchors continuity with ADES receipt. Future entries must honor dual-signature policy." "title": "Crypto Upgrade Event" "user": "\"I wish to upgrade this Deed from single-signature Ed25519 to dual-signature with PQC.\"" "user_payload": "current_signature_policy": - "ed25519" "deed_ref": "00AI" "event_type": "CRYPTO_UPGRADE" "new_signature_policy": - "ed25519" - "dilithium3" "pqc_pubkey": "dilithium3:pub:newKey" "witnesses": - "w1" - "w2" - "w3" - "w4" "validator": "\"Provide the Deed, the new PQC key, witnesses, and confirm continuity with prior policy.\"" "validator_checks": - "Deed is valid and immutable." - "Vault Logic is non-Turing and allows CRYPTO_UPGRADE." - "Witness diversity requirements satisfied (geo + institutional spread)." - "Continuity confirmed": "old signatures valid; new PQC attestation verified." "RootZero016003_Flow": - "Step 1": "Context — user declares deed_ref and intended operation." - "Step 2": "Identifiers — provide pubkeys, lineage references, and witness signatures." - "Step 3": "Time — timestamp fixed; monotonicity is checked against prior Journal entries." - "Step 4": "Policy — validator fetches vault_logic_ref; enforces non-Turing compliance (finite, bounded, acyclic) and evaluates predicates deterministically." - "Step 5": "Evidence — attach attestations (witness, AI execution, custody proofs)." - "Step 6": "Signatures — apply declared signature_policy (e.g., Ed25519, PQC, or both) over canonical bytes; validator adds attestations." - "Step 7": "Journal & Registry — Journal is appended; Registry settlement anchored in double-entry with signatures and crypto_attestations." "RootZero016004_LandlordTone": "Speak only once, speak correctly, and the record will live forever. Speak wrongly, and the Vault will not hear you. The Vault does not bend. The Vault does not forgive malformed speech. Signature policy is declared at birth—Ed25519, PQC, or both. Declare once, or evolve only by lawful upgrade. Continuity survives across generations because the structure demands it. It is better to be silent than to speak against the protocol." "RootZero016005_Warnings": - "If time is not monotonic → REJECT:E-TURN" - "If witnesses are insufficient or not diverse → REJECT:E-WIT-DIV" - "If scope exceeds Deed authority → REJECT:E-SCOPE" - "If canonicalization fails (anchors, unicode, hidden fields) → REJECT:E-NFC or E-ANCHOR" - "If signature_policy mismatch → REJECT:E-SIG-POLICY" - "If PQC attestation invalid → REJECT:E-PQC" - "If Vault Logic fails non-Turing check → REJECT:E-NONTURING" "RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption": "RootZero017001_Description": "The Vault is structure, and structure carries rent. Floors protect scarcity; royalties sustain continuity. Gold (Au) anchors value; daily fixing anchors fairness. Terms are final and uniform across all tenants. Ownership is scarce, issuance is sovereign, leasing is inclusive. The landlord is neutral: Root Zero enforces structure, never price." "RootZero017002_AnchorVsMedium": "anchor_unit": "Gold (kg Au) as unit of account" "daily_fixing_process": "ORDER_CREATED locks the Pricing Date. ORDER_CREATED = the moment a valid purchase order is received AND an acknowledgment is sent back to the buyer. The Pricing Date is the UTC calendar date of ORDER_CREATED. For that date, the designated price oracle publishes the primary Au/USD fixing at 00:00 UTC. If PRIMARY is unavailable, Root Zero falls back to a 24-hour VWAP (FALLBACK_VWAP). If both PRIMARY and FALLBACK_VWAP are unavailable, Root Zero may carry forward the prior day's fixing (FALLBACK_CARRYFORWARD), except that the very first day of protocol operation may never use carryforward. The hash of the fixing and the mode (PRIMARY, FALLBACK_VWAP, or FALLBACK_CARRYFORWARD) is anchored in the Registry (see RootZero015004_RegistryEntryTemplate). All invoices, self-assessed payments, and Registry valuations for that UTC day reference the same fixing. Fairness is preserved: all tenants settle against one anchor per day." "payment_media": - "Fiat (USD, EUR, GBP)" - "Crypto (BTC, ETH)" - "Stablecoins" - ">- Equity (Startup program only; accepted as consideration under separate Startup Equity agreements; Registry accounting remains Au-denominated)" "RootZero017003A_LengthLevelsAndClasses": "character_counting_rule": "Length is measured in Unicode code points after applying the Vault’s canonical normalization. Each valid identifier is a finite sequence of normalized code points. Composite characters, emojis, and script-specific forms are treated as the number of code points they occupy post-normalization." "deed_classes": "classes": - "class": "Standard" "description": "Default commercial class for 6+ code-point IDs. Pays cash Floor." "level": 6 - "class": "Nonprofit" "description": "Standard class eligible for an additional 50% discount (stackable with Founding) upon Master Custodian approval and verification as a qualified nonprofit." "level": 6 - "class": "Startup" "description": "Standard class where consideration is in equity (3% base stake, adjusted by Founding discounts as applicable) instead of cash. Admission requires Master Custodian approval. Equity mechanics are handled via separate Startup Equity agreements." "level": 6 - "class": "Premium-10" "description": "Cash-paying premium Deeds exactly five (5) code points in length." "level": 5 - "class": "Premium-100" "description": "Cash-paying premium Deeds exactly four (4) code points in length." "level": 4 - "class": "Premium-1000" "description": "Cash-paying premium Deeds exactly three (3) code points in length." "level": 3 - "class": "Premium-10000" "description": "Cash-paying premium Deeds exactly two (2) code points in length." "level": 2 - "class": "Trunk" "description": "Single-code-point sovereign namespaces, including Commercial Trunks and the Reserved Root Trunk. Trunks enjoy perpetual namespace sovereignty and commercialization-path control over descendants (rightful seller path). Commercial Trunks are always purchased at their full Trunk Floor; no discounts, irrespective of prior Sub-ID issuance." "level": 1 "description": "Deed classes are economic/eligibility categories layered on top of levels. Levels are structural (length-based). Classes are economic (pricing and programs)." "level_mapping": - "length": "exactly 1 code point" "level": 1 "name": "Trunk" - "length": "exactly 2 code points" "level": 2 "name": "Premium-10000" - "length": "exactly 3 code points" "level": 3 "name": "Premium-1000" - "length": "exactly 4 code points" "level": 4 "name": "Premium-100" - "length": "exactly 5 code points" "level": 5 "name": "Premium-10" - "length": "6 or more code points (no upper bound)" "level": 6 "name": "Standard" "RootZero017003_PricingFloors": "Premium": "add_on": - "alias_class": "Alias-10000" "floor": "10000 kg Au" "meaning": "Exclusive alias rights for designated private-use Trunks only — attachable to Trunks minted on Unicode private-use code points. The alias is a human-readable overlay chosen by the Deed owner (e.g., \"Dream\", \"We Are\", or a corporate name). It is branding-only, never minting authority or issuance sovereignty, and may not duplicate any existing visible code point." - "floor": "10000 kg Au" "meaning": "Deeded Sub-IDs (i.e., minted descendant Deeds) sold before their root commercial Trunk is sold incur an additional 10000 kg Au at the time of each such Sub-ID purchase. Exemptions: deeded Sub-IDs under the \"0\" Trunk (U+0030) and Founding Deeds." "pre_trunk_subid": "SubID-10000" - "floor": "100000 kg Au" "meaning": "A one-time add-on purchasable for any Deed class. From the date this add-on is recorded in the Registry, no further derivative royalties shall ever accrue for that Deed. Past-due royalties remain payable. Floors on new issuance or transfers still apply." "royalty_class": "RoyaltyFree-100000" "tiers": - "floor": "10 kg Au" "level": 5 "meaning": "Rare, high-value IDs exactly five (5) code points in length." "premium_class": "Premium-10" - "floor": "100 kg Au" "level": 4 "meaning": "Scarce short-form IDs or culturally significant combinations exactly four (4) code points in length." "premium_class": "Premium-100" - "floor": "1000 kg Au" "level": 3 "meaning": "Elite parcels — heritage words, iconic strings exactly three (3) code points in length." "premium_class": "Premium-1000" - "floor": "10000 kg Au" "level": 2 "meaning": "Sovereign-scale namespaces exactly two (2) code points in length. Unmatched under Root Zero, though Trunks remain higher in sovereignty." "premium_class": "Premium-10000" "Standard": "floor": "1 kg Au" "level": 6 "meaning": "The base parcel of sovereign digital land: 6+ code-point IDs. Applies equally to Standard, Nonprofit, and Startup deeds. Expensive enough to deter spam, yet attainable for institutions. Leasing ensures practical inclusivity: access can be offered at any price." "Trunk": "Commercial": "floor": "100000 kg Au" "level": 1 "meaning": "Commercial Trunks include U+0030 (\"0\") and extend across all printable one-code-point IDs, including designated private-use code points. By policy, \"0\" (U+0030) is the first commercial Trunk, but it is not genesis (genesis is U+0000). Each Commercial Trunk is a sovereign sibling of Root Zero, carrying unmatched namespace sovereignty and commercialization-path control over descendants (the rightful seller path). Authorized Custodians (the Master Custodian and any licensed Nation Custodian acting as Root Zero’s agent) perform the MINT act; Commercial Custodians do not mint. Trunk owners hold the perpetual commercial path rights over descendants. Royalties apply unless and until a RoyaltyFree-100000 add-on is purchased and recorded." "Reserved": "floor": "none" "level": 1 "meaning": "The Reserved Root Trunk (RootZero, U+0000, Unicode name \"NULL\") is the genesis coordinate (0) and is perpetually Root Zero–only. It anchors law and vault integrity but is never commercialized or sold. It is NOT the commercial character \"0\" (U+0030)." "RootZero017004_FoundingDeedsPricing": "explanation": "Founding discounts reward early risk-takers while preserving continuity. A 10% down payment secures a right-of-first-refusal for 24 months. The down payment reserves an option; it does not itself complete issuance. The Deed is minted/transferred only when the buyer completes the remaining balance (or the required equity transfer, as applicable) within the window. If abandoned, only the down payment is lost and the land returns to market. After expiry, reacquisition requires full Floor payment without discount." "nonprofit_stacking": "Approved Nonprofit Deeds in the Standard class receive an additional 50% discount on the amount due after any Founding discount has been applied. Example: a 2nd Founding Standard at 50% of Floor becomes 25% of Floor for a qualified Nonprofit." "rules": - ">- Founding discounts apply to the first 3 Founding Reservations per Deed class at the global level, once in the lifetime of that class. A Founding Reservation is created when the non-refundable 10% down payment is received AND an acknowledgment is sent. The reservation consumes a Founding slot immediately; if the buyer withdraws or expires, the Founding slot is not reset. Custodian-issued free or waived Deeds do not count toward the first 3." - ">- \"Deed class\" for this rule means an economic class (e.g., Standard cash, Nonprofit Standard, Startup Standard, Premium-10, Premium-100, Premium-1000, Premium-10000, Trunk), not a geographic or trunk-specific subclass." - ">- Once all three (3) Founding slots for a class have been reserved, all subsequent Deeds in that class are priced at the full Floor (subject only to any Nonprofit or Startup programs as approved)." "special_payment_terms": "automatic_expiry": "If the remaining balance / required equity transfer is incomplete by 24 months + 1 day, withdrawal is automatic. No notice is required." "decision_window": "24 months from date of down payment" "down_payment": "10% of discounted Floor, non-refundable" "options": - "Proceed": "Pay the remaining 90% within the window and secure the Deed at the Founding price (or complete equity transfer as applicable)." - "Withdraw": "Abandon the purchase; the 10% down payment is forfeited and the Deed returns to inventory." "post_expiry_pricing": "After expiry, reacquisition of the same class requires full Floor price without discount, and the Founding slot used is not reset." "startup_equity_terms": "Startup Standard Deeds satisfy the Au-denominated Floor via equity instead of cash. The base equity stake is 3% of the company. Founding discounts translate into reduced equity: 0.75% for the 1st Founding Startup Deed, 1.50% for the 2nd, 2.25% for the 3rd, and 3% thereafter. Admission to the Startup program requires Master Custodian approval." "tiers": - "discount": "75%" "id": "1st_deed" - "discount": "50%" "id": "2nd_deed" - "discount": "25%" "id": "3rd_deed" "RootZero017005A_CustodianHierarchy": "commercial_custodian": "compensation": "Commercial Custodians are compensated via separate contractual arrangements (fees, service retainers, or splits) but do not receive an automatic share of Floors or royalties unless explicitly granted by the Master or Nation Custodian." "description": "A Commercial Custodian is a licensed private or public entity that performs onboarding, KYC/KYB, education, support, and other operational services for Deed holders and applicants." "limitations": - "May not mint Deeds or Trunks." - "May not grant discounts or waive Floors." - ">- May not alter Registry entries except as authorized (e.g., operational updates executed through approved interfaces)." "master_custodian": "description": "The Master Custodian is the ultimate authority over issuance, Registry integrity, and Vault economics. In practice this is Root Zero or a designated successor." "exclusive_powers": - "Mint new Deeds and Trunks." - "Modify Vault Rules (within governance constraints)." - "Authorize any discounts, waivers, or free issuances." - "Approve Nonprofit and Startup status." - "Designate and revoke Nation and Commercial Custodian licenses." - "\"Determine Penalized Buyer status and apply anti-circumvention.\"" "nation_custodian": "description": "A Nation Custodian is a sovereign state or state-authorized entity licensed by the Master Custodian to operate within a specific territory or region. It functions as the primary gate through which Deed sales in that region are prepared and coordinated, and may build local validator networks and tools." "limitations": - "May not authorize discounts, waivers, or free issuances." - "May not alter Vault Rules or Registry logic." - "\"Operates under Master Custodian oversight and revocable license.\"" "revenue_share": "A Nation Custodian earns 10% of all Floors and 10% of all royalties attributable to Deeds sold or operated through its designated region, calculated on the standard (undiscounted) Floor amount for commission purposes. As a share of the discounted amount paid by the buyer, this implies: 40% on 1st Founding Deeds (75% discount; buyer pays 25%), 20% on 2nd Founding Deeds (50% discount; buyer pays 50%), 13.33% on 3rd Founding Deeds (25% discount; buyer pays 75%), and 10% on standard-priced Deeds (buyer pays 100%)." "RootZero017005_CustodianAuthority": "description": "Licensed Custodians may serve as on-ramps and operational arms of Root Zero, but economic sovereignty over Floors and discounts remains with the Master Custodian. Custodians may facilitate issuance at standard, discounted, or waived Floors only when explicitly authorized by the Master Custodian under special programs (nonprofits, startups, R&D conversions, pilots)." "effect": "Custodians serve as on-ramps, lowering entry barriers and localizing support without undermining scarcity, registry integrity, or the neutrality of Root Zero’s economic rules." "guarantees": - "Authentic and enforceable Deeds, equal in rights to directly-issued Deeds." - "No tenant suffers diminished legitimacy due to Custodian involvement." - "\"All Deeds recorded in lineage and Registry, even when Floor is hidden.\"" "minted_sibling_mechanism": "description": "Custodians, on behalf of Root Zero, may pre-mint commercial Trunks and record them in the Registry as \"Minted, Available for Purchase.\" These Trunks retain Root Zero sovereignty until sold." "rules": - ">- Deeded Sub-IDs may be issued under a pre-minted commercial Trunk prior to its sale (e.g., \"NYC\" under \"N\"). Ancestry remains intact: N → NYC." - ">- Registry entries must clearly display \"Minted, Available for Purchase\" status for any pre-minted commercial Trunk." - ">- Commercial Trunks are always purchased at their full Trunk Floor; no discounts, irrespective of prior Sub-ID issuance." - ">- Deeded Sub-IDs sold before their root commercial Trunk is sold incur an additional 10000 kg Au at the time of each such Sub-ID purchase. Exemptions: deeded Sub-IDs under the \"0\" Trunk (U+0030) and Founding Deeds." - ">- Buyers must see complete namespace status (including any pre-minted or pre-issued Sub-IDs) before committing to purchase." "prohibited": - ">- Custodians may not issue or transact Deeds under the Reserved Root Trunk (RootZero, U+0000). That branch is Root Zero–only." - ">- No Custodian other than the Master Custodian may authorize discounts, waive Floors, or grant free Deeds. All such decisions must be explicitly approved and recorded by the Master Custodian." "RootZero017006_IssuanceRules": "new_deeds_trigger_floor": true "note": "Every new Deed minted — whether first issuance or transfer to a new tenant — requires settlement of its class Floor, denominated in gold (kg Au) as the unit of account. This is the landlord’s rent: unavoidable, uniform, and final. Settlement may occur in any approved payment medium, with gold equivalence determined by the daily fixing for the Pricing Date (the UTC date of ORDER_CREATED) for fiat/crypto/stablecoins. For the Startup program, the Au-denominated Floor is satisfied via the predefined equity stake schedule under separate Startup Equity agreements. Markups above Floor are royalty-free profit to the holder. Upgrades between classes (e.g., Standard → Premium → Trunk) require paying the Floor difference where applicable." "transfers_or_resales_trigger_floor": true "RootZero017007A_SubleaseProhibition": "distinction": "Namespace control (write/anchor rights) is exclusive and non-transferable by lessees. Content access (read/reference rights) is unrestricted and freely distributable." "enforcement": "Granting namespace control rights to a third party constitutes sublease and terminates the lease immediately. All payments made by the lessee are forfeited to the Deed owner." "permitted_use": "Lessees may freely: - >-\n Create hierarchical identifiers (deedless sub-identifiers) under their leased namespace\n for internal structure and content addressing (this does not mint Deeds and does not\n confer Deed ownership to any party).\n- Distribute content, data, or services anchored to the namespace - Share deedless copies with unlimited end users End users accessing such content are readers/consumers, not subleasees. They receive no namespace control rights. Leases mint no new Deeds." "rule": "Sublease of namespace control rights is prohibited. Lessees may not grant, transfer, or sublease their namespace control rights to third parties. Only registered Deed owners may lease namespace control rights." "sublessee_status": "Parties receiving namespace control rights from a lessee have no protection under Root Zero. Their access is void, and they have no standing in Registry disputes." "RootZero017007_Royalties": "derivative_income": "declaration_and_enforcement": "Declare quarterly via DERIV_INCOME_DECL Journal entry. Anchor declarations in Registry via ADES. Custodians reconcile with market signals, comparable namespaces, and accountant attestations. Default definition (for COUNTER-DEED purposes): (a) non-payment of lawfully due royalties for royalty-bearing quarters, OR (b) persistent non-filing after lawful notice and cure, such that Root Zero or a Custodian must estimate Derivative Revenues and issue a royalty invoice; non-payment of that invoice is treated as royalty default. Enforcement path: notice → short cure → Custodian mediation → COUNTER-DEED only if unresolved Default persists. Random Audit Rule: a percentage of Deeds (at least 2%) are selected each quarter. Fraud or under-reporting → double royalty penalty (subject to legal maximum) + public Registry note. Verified declarations receive a “Verified” mark, strengthening credibility. Audits reference RootZero0240_Specimens/EnterpriseOps_Acceptance for enforcement patterns." "definition": "Derivative Revenues = all commercial monetization directly attributable to namespace control (leasing, licensing, alias rentals tied to namespace control, subscription or usage fees where access is structurally anchored to the Deed). Plain transfers, resales, gifts, inheritances, and structural issuance or sale of Sub-IDs (including markup above internal Floors) are NOT derivative revenues." "explanation": "Royalties sustain Root Zero after the royalty-free grace period. They apply only to ongoing, rent-like income, never to outright sales of Deeds or Sub-IDs. This balances fairness (growth untaxed) with continuity (rent contributes back)." "grace_period_quarters": 20 "lease_is_derivative": true "leases_do_not_issue_new_deeds": true "rate": "5% of Derivative Revenues per royalty-bearing quarter" "reporting_and_payment": "Reporting is mandatory for ALL calendar quarters from the Purchase Quarter onward, even when Derivative Revenues are zero. Deed holders must file a DERIV_INCOME_DECL each quarter within the specified deadline and self- assess royalties for each royalty-bearing quarter. Royalties are due at the time of filing; no Root Zero invoice is required to create the obligation." "royalty_free_upgrade_effect": "A Deed upgraded with RoyaltyFree-100000 before the start of Quarter 21 never owes royalties. If upgraded after royalties have begun, no further royalties accrue from the upgrade date forward, but previously accrued royalties remain payable." "royalty_quarter_model": "Each Deed has a Purchase Quarter: the calendar quarter in which its ORDER_CREATED / mint date falls. The first twenty (20) consecutive calendar quarters starting with the Purchase Quarter form that Deed’s royalty-free grace period (Quarter 1–20). Quarters 21 and onward are royalty-bearing. The grace period is per Deed and does not reset on resale; subsequent owners inherit the remaining quarters." "sublease_rules": "See RootZero017007A_SubleaseProhibition" "waived_for": - "Trunk with RoyaltyFree-100000" - "\"Any Deed upgraded to RoyaltyFree-100000\"" "non_derivative_events": "gift": "No royalty" "inheritance": "No royalty" "resale": "No royalty" "transfer": "No royalty" "RootZero017008_RAndDIDs": "conversion": - "R&D → Standard → Premium → Trunk" - "Upgrades allowed anytime by paying Floor difference." - "\"Continuity bundles preserve Journal lineage across migrations.\"" "description": "Anyone may create R&D IDs — free, deedless vaults that mimic Root Zero. They serve as sandboxes for education, AI training, and experimentation." "guarantees": - "Safe experimentation without cost." - "No R&D ID is authentic until converted into a Deeded Vault." - "Upgraded IDs carry full lineage of prior sandbox history." "purpose": "R&D IDs democratize practice, giving students, developers, and AI safe access to Vault mechanics before committing capital." "RootZero017009_MigrationAndUpgrades": "implication": "Upgrade logic ensures growth is cumulative, not wasteful. Every investment carries forward in lineage." "processes": - "description": "Conversion of legacy namespaces or R&D structures into authentic, Floor-paying Deeds. Preserves continuity while discarding obsolete scaffolding." "name": "Migration from unneeded structures" - "description": "Movement between Deed classes: Standard → Premium → Trunk. Encourages tenants to start small and scale upward. Continuity preserved via Journals and Registry anchoring." "name": "Upgrade path" "RootZero017010_AncestryAndPrefix": "examples": - "presented_as": "RootZero AI (reserved, non-commercial)" "source": "RootZero → AI" - "presented_as": "1AI" "source": "1 → AI" - "context": "under Trunk 1" "presented_as": "1976" "source": "1 → 9 → 7 → 6" "rule": "No ID is naked; all carry their ancestry. IDs under RootZero are reserved for Root Zero vault ancestry only and never commercialized. All market-facing IDs carry ancestry from commercial trunks." "RootZero017011_LandlordTone": "Floors guard the land. Royalties pave the roads. Leases are trade: they count as derivative income but mint no new land. Lease, but do not sublease. Guests may not invite their own guests—only the landlord grants tenancy. Namespace control is yours to use, never to lend. Your creations, however, are yours to share freely. Sales and transfers pass hands, but every new Deed to a new tenant settles the Floor as landlord rent. Pay on time; dwell in peace. Random audits keep all honest: a living fraction of the Vault shall be tested each quarter. If you stand clean, you stand taller. Trunks and Premiums are sovereignties. Holding one means perpetual namespace sovereignty and the commercialization-path right over descendants (Custodians mint; rightful sellers sell). Leasing spreads access while ownership stays scarce. Founding Deeds carry rare grace: 10% buys the chance, 24 moons decide the fate. After that, no grace remains; the land returns to market at full Floor. The Reserved Root Trunk is Root Zero–only; commerce begins at the first commercial trunks. Twenty quarters of grace let builders grow; from the twenty-first, rent returns to the roads unless you have bought your freedom outright." "RootZero017012_ReportingAndCompliance": "escalation_and_revocation": "cure_period_after_notice_days": 7 "escalation_path": "Non-filing (after lawful notice and cure), non-payment of lawfully due royalties, or severe under-reporting triggers notice and a short cure window. If unresolved, Root Zero or a Custodian may attempt mediation. Persistent Royalty Default (as defined in RootZero017007_Royalties) may result in COUNTER-DEED: revocation of the Deed, reversion to Root Zero inventory, and permanent Penalized Buyer status for the holder." "penalties": "legal_maximum_rule": "Wherever a 2× multiplier on unpaid or estimated royalties is specified, if a court or authority finds that 2× is not fully enforceable, the penalty automatically adjusts to the maximum multiplier or monetary amount permitted by applicable law. The provision is trimmed, not voided; public notations remain to the fullest extent allowed." "non_response": "rule": "If a holder fails to respond to an audit notice or to provide the required accountant letter within the response window, Root Zero may estimate Derivative Revenues using reasonable market data and comparable namespaces, invoice royalties on that estimate, and apply a penalty of up to 2× the normal royalty amount on the estimated base, subject to the legal maximum. A permanent \"non-response\" notation is added to the Registry." "under_reporting": "rule": "If an audit and accountant attestation show under-reporting, the holder must pay the unpaid royalty plus a penalty of up to 2× the unpaid royalty amount, subject to the legal maximum permitted by applicable law. A permanent public notation is recorded on both the Deed and the holder’s Registry identity." "quarterly_reporting": "deadline": "Within 30 days after each calendar quarter end" "description": "Every Deed with potential derivative activity is subject to quarterly reporting from the Purchase Quarter onward, even when Derivative Revenues are zero. Deed holders must file DERIV_INCOME_DECL within thirty (30) days of each calendar quarter end, stating revenues per Deed or namespace and explicitly reporting \"0\" where no Derivative Revenues occurred." "filing_code": "DERIV_INCOME_DECL" "mandatory_for_all_quarters": true "payment_with_filing": "For royalty-bearing quarters, royalties (5% of Derivative Revenues) are self-assessed and due at the time of filing. Root Zero is not required to issue invoices for ordinary quarterly royalties; the obligation arises directly from the Vault Rules and the holder’s declaration." "zero_declarations_required": true "random_audits": "accountant_requirements": "The attesting professional must be a CPA or equivalent locally licensed auditor, reasonably independent under local standards. The letter must confirm Derivative Revenues for the audited period and whether declarations are fairly stated in all material respects." "description": "At least two percent of Deeds in good standing are randomly selected for audit each quarter. Selection is algorithmic and anchored in the Registry for transparency. Root Zero may initiate additional targeted audits where fraud or significant under-reporting is suspected." "licensed_accountant_attestation_required": true "response_window_days": 15 "selection_rate": "≥2% of Deeds per quarter" "RootZero017013_PenalizedBuyerRegime": "anti_circumvention": "The Penalized Buyer designation extends, to the extent permitted by law, to entities under common control, beneficial ownership, or direction with the penalized Registry identity, as determined by Master Custodian KYC/KYB procedures on a documented basis. Root Zero may refuse transactions or apply Penalized Buyer pricing where it reasonably believes a new buyer is effectively controlled by a Penalized Buyer." "clemency": "The Master Custodian may, in rare cases and on a fully documented basis, grant partial or full clemency to a Penalized Buyer, but is under no obligation to do so. Clemency decisions do not erase historical notations." "consequences": "discount_exclusion": "Penalized Buyers are ineligible for Founding discounts, Nonprofit discounts, Startup equity concessions, or any other discretionary discount programs, except where exclusion would violate mandatory local law. No Custodian may waive this exclusion." "future_pricing": "For any subsequent Deed purchased directly or indirectly from Root Zero, a Penalized Buyer must pay up to 2× the applicable Floor (plus required add-ons such as SubID-10000), applied before any discounts. This 2× multiplier is subject to the legal maximum rule; where 2× is not fully enforceable, the highest lawful multiplier or amount applies instead." "registry_marking": "Penalized Buyer status is publicly visible in the Registry, together with notations explaining the cause of revocation (e.g., non-payment, fraud, repeated under-reporting). These notations are permanent and travel with the identity." "rule": "Any Registry identity (individual or legal entity) that has a Deed revoked via COUNTER-DEED for persistent Royalty Default (as defined in RootZero017007_Royalties, including non-payment of royalties and associated penalty/estimate invoices arising from non-filing) is permanently marked as a \"Penalized Buyer\" in the Registry. This designation is irrevocable, subject only to mandatory rights under applicable law." "RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure": "RootZero018001_Description": "The Vault is not software; it is structure. Deeds carry their own rules. Vault Logic is the tenant’s constitution — portable, declarative, and immutable in form. Infrastructure is minimal: validators enforce, Journals attest, Registry anchors. AI and human alike may serve as executors, provided they obey the rules." "RootZero018002_VaultLogicDesign": "nature": "Non-Turing, declarative, deterministic. Policies are conditions and predicates, never arbitrary code. They travel with the Deed, not with controllers. Every validator, every AI, every witness can recompute the same outcome." "structure": - "Acceptance rules define who may act, when, and under what evidence." - "Turn-order ensures monotonic time; first-valid wins, conflicts are rejected." - "Witness quorums provide legitimacy; diversity ensures resilience." - "AI execution permitted only if logged, fingerprinted, and counter-signed." "RootZero018003_ConfigurableParameters": "ai_signing": "enabled": false "note": "Toggle determines whether AI is advisory only or may act as a principal agent." "toggles": - "default": true "description": "AI may draft payloads, but must be co-signed by human/witness." "name": "ai_drafting" - "default": false "description": "AI may directly sign if model_hash + weights_hash + runtime_fingerprint are logged." "name": "ai_signing" "continuity_bundles": "note": "Mandated where sovereignty continuity is critical; optional elsewhere." "optional_for": - "Premium" - "Standard" "required_for": - "InheritanceVaults" - "Trunks" "delegation": "allowed": true "expiration_required": true "note": "Delegations must specify scope and time-bounds; open-ended delegations are rejected." "scopes": - "content/sign" - "vote/attest" - "finance/transfer" "signature_policy": "default": "ed25519-only" "note": "Declared when a CVID is created. Immutable for that CVID once declared. Dual mode requires both Ed25519 and PQC signatures. Mixed ledgers are possible: some CVIDs Ed25519-only, some PQC-only, some dual. This balances current operability with future-proof continuity. Policy evolution occurs via CRYPTO_UPGRADE, which seals the prior CVID and issues a successor honoring the new policy (see RootZero015003_JournalEntryTemplate and RootZero0160_InteractionProtocol). Signature_policy MUST be the enum string only; do not list algorithms here." "options": - "ed25519-only" - "pqc-only" - "dual" "required": true "type": "enum" "turn_order": "enabled": true "mode": "default": "first-valid-wins" "options": - "first-valid-wins" - "strict-monotonic" - "timestamp-priority" "note": "Tenant selects mode at issuance; cannot be changed retroactively." "witnesses": "diversity_dimensions": - "jurisdiction" - "institutional_class" - "geography" "min_required": "default": 3 "range": "1–7" "note": "Vault Logic enforces diversity. At least 1 dimension must differ." "RootZero018004_AcceptanceRules": "canonicalization": "Canonical YAML 1.2, NFC Unicode, LF line endings, sorted keys, no anchors. Violations → immediate REJECT with explicit error code (E-NFC, E-ANCHOR, etc.)." "commercialization_path": "rules": "On purchase of an ID, the rightful SELLER is the nearest SOLD ancestor along the prefix path. Examples: - If \"N\" is sold and buyer wants \"NYC\", buyer must buy from owner of \"N\" (who may price above floor). Custodian then performs MINT → buyer, at agreed price (≥ floor). - If \"NY\" is sold and buyer wants \"NYC\", buyer must buy from owner of \"NY\". Custodian then MINTs \"NYC\" to buyer at that commercial price. - If \"N\" and \"NY\" are unsold and buyer wants \"NYC\", custodian must first pre-mint \"N\" as \"Minted, Available for Purchase\" (registry flag), then MINT \"NYC\". Apply the 10,000 kg Au add-on per SubID-10000 rule. (See RootZero017005_CustodianAuthority → minted_sibling_mechanism.)" "validator_checks": - "Verify nearest sold ancestor selection is correct; attempts to bypass rightful seller → REJECT:E-PATH-SELL." - "If required ancestor is not pre-minted as \"Minted, Available for Purchase\" when unsold → REJECT:E-PREMINT-NOT-SET." - "Ensure price ≥ class floor + applicable add-ons (e.g., 10,000 kg Au for pre-trunk Sub-IDs)." - "Ensure ADES receipt anchors settlement and matches daily Au fixing." "conflict_resolution": "Turn-order mode is locked at issuance (first-valid-wins, strict-monotonic, or timestamp-priority). Immutable thereafter." "deed_class_constraints": "Every action must respect the class and level of the Deed. Only Root Zero (via Licensed Custodians) may MINT Deeds. Trunks do not mint; Standard and Premium do not mint. Trunks and other ancestors control the commercial path (who the buyer must purchase from), not the act of minting. (See RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption.)" "minting_authority": "MINT issuer = Root Zero acting through a Licensed Custodian. Any MINT attempt by a non-custodian actor → REJECT:E-MINT-AUTH. Validators must verify custodian license status and Registry capability before accepting MINT." "signature_acceptance": - ">- If journal.entry.signature_policy is absent → apply signature_policy_defaults.vault_default." - "ed25519-only → require ≥1 valid ed25519 signature." - "pqc-only(dilithium3) → require ≥1 valid dilithium3 signature." - "dual(ed25519,dilithium3) → require ≥1 valid ed25519 AND ≥1 valid dilithium3 signature." "signatures": "Every Journal Entry must conform to its declared signature_policy. If Ed25519-only → require valid Ed25519 signature. If PQC-only → require valid PQC signature. If Dual → require both signatures; failure of either → REJECT:E-SIG-POLICY. PQC verification errors return explicit code (E-PQC). Signature policy cannot be changed once the CVID is sealed; use CRYPTO_UPGRADE to issue a successor CVID under the new policy." "witness_quorum": "Quorum rules configurable (1–7). Minimum must be satisfied. Diversity always required: witnesses cannot all share the same jurisdiction or class." "RootZero018005_InfrastructureModel": "paradigm_shift": "Where today’s systems rely on controllers and overrides, the Vault relies on structure and proofs. Law is thin, policy is local, enforcement is mechanical. This reduces overhead, eliminates intermediaries, and scales without trust bottlenecks." "today_vs_vault": "today_infrastructure": - "IAM directories, APIs, cloud controllers" - "Perimeter firewalls and oversight teams" - "Redundant audit systems and reconciliation engines" "vault_model": - "Deeds replace IAM": "identity is the record itself." - "Vault Logic replaces middleware policy servers." - "Registry replaces reconciliations; one source anchors all." - "AI can run acceptance proofs deterministically; no human oversight required." "RootZero018006_ContinuityAndResilience": "kill_switch_avoided": - "No global kill switch exists. No single party may revoke structure." - "Offline recomputation possible at any time." - "Continuity Bundles allow cold-start in court or sovereign context." "migration_and_upgrades": - "description": "Conversion from obsolete systems or R&D vaults into valid Deeds. Journals preserve continuity; obsolete scaffolding may be discarded." "name": "Legacy Migrations" - "description": "Tenants may ascend (Standard → Premium → Trunk). Floor differentials must be paid; Journals preserve lineage. No downgrade path; sovereignty only ascends." "name": "Upgrades" "RootZero018007_LandlordTone": "Vault Logic is your constitution; configure it wisely. Three witnesses suffice, but you may demand more. Turn-order is your clock — choose it at issuance, and it will not bend. AI may draft or sign, but only if its fingerprints are shown. Delegations must be scoped and timed; no eternal grants. Continuity has no switch — only bundles and lineage endure. Signature policy is your oath; once declared, it cannot be undone." "RootZero018008_SignaturePolicyDefaults": "allowed_pqc_algs": - "dilithium3" "override_per_journal_entry": true "vault_default": "ed25519-only" "RootZero0190_Macros": "RootZero019001_Description": "Canonical, reusable policy macros for Vault Logic. Each macro has a stable canonical_id. Where legacy names existed, they are preserved under aliases for strict backward compatibility." "RootZero019002_Index": - "aliases": - "AIAuditMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.AI.COSIGN.AUDITED.V1" "summary": "Enable AI co-signing with full traceability and human override." - "aliases": - "AIRestrictedMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.AI.ACCESS.RESTRICTED.V1" "summary": "Disallow AI access/signing; human-only vaults." - "aliases": - "DisputeResolutionMacros" "canonical_id": "POLICY.DISPUTE.BUNDLE.ESCALATION.V1" "summary": "Structured dispute macros for proofs, escalation, and finality." - "aliases": - "EmergencySuccessionMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.SUCCESSION.EMERGENCY_TRIGGER.V1" "summary": "Urgent succession activation on executor failure." - "aliases": - "InheritanceMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.SUCCESSION.EQUAL_SHARE.V1" "summary": "Equal-share inheritance with deterministic triggers." - "aliases": - "MultiJurisdictionInheritanceMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.SUCCESSION.MULTI_JURISDICTION.V1" "summary": "Inheritance across jurisdictions with validator arbitration." - "aliases": - "OpenLicenseMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.LICENSING.OPEN.CC_BY_4_0.V1" "summary": "Global open-access license with attribution." - "aliases": - "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OFF.BY.DEFAULT.V1" "canonical_id": "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OFF_BY_DEFAULT.V1" "summary": "Reject AI signatures unless explicitly toggled." - "aliases": - "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OPTIN.WITH.FLAG.V1" "canonical_id": "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OPT_IN_WITH_FLAG.V1" "summary": "Allow AI signatures only with explicit opt-in and human co-sign." - "canonical_id": "POLICY.PRICE.ANCHOR.COMMIT.V1" "summary": "Require SHA256 anchor on priced events." - "aliases": - "POLICY.ROYALTY.ANNUAL_REPORTING.AUDIT_2PCT.V1" - "POLICY.ROYALTY.ANNUAL.REPORTING.AUDIT2PCT.V1" "canonical_id": "POLICY.ROYALTY.QUARTERLY_REPORTING.AUDIT_2PCT.V1" "summary": "Mandate quarterly royalty reporting with up to 2% random audits per quarter." - "canonical_id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.DUAL.V1" "summary": "Default dual signature policy (ed25519 + dilithium3)." - "canonical_id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.ED25519.V1" "summary": "Default ed25519-only signature policy." - "canonical_id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.PQC.V1" "summary": "Default PQC-only (dilithium3) signature policy." - "canonical_id": "POLICY.TURN_ORDER.STRICT.V1" "summary": "Strict sequential execution; no skipped turn indices." - "canonical_id": "POLICY.WITNESS.MIN3.DIVERSE.V1" "summary": "Require ≥3 witnesses from ≥3 institutions and ≥2 jurisdictions." - "aliases": - "PreApprovedMacros" "canonical_id": "POLICY.LIB.PREAPPROVED.V1" "summary": "Collection of canonical snippets for reuse across Vault Logic." - "aliases": - "ReadOnlyMacro" "canonical_id": "POLICY.VAULT.READ_ONLY.V1" "summary": "Strict read-only archival mode; no edits after finalization." "RootZero019003_Macros": "RootZero01900301_PreApprovedMacros": "description": "Pre-approved, canonical policy snippets used for rapid, deterministic reuse across Vault Logic configurations. Designed for sovereign use without external dependencies." "lifecycle_stage": "active" "macros": - "meaning": "Require ≥3 witnesses from ≥3 institutions and ≥2 jurisdictions." "policy_id": "POLICY.WITNESS.MIN3.DIVERSE.V1" - "meaning": "AI signatures are rejected unless a local toggle enables them." "policy_id": "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OFF_BY_DEFAULT.V1" - "meaning": "Allow AI signatures only when explicitly toggled ON and co-signed by a human." "policy_id": "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OPT_IN_WITH_FLAG.V1" - "meaning": "For MINT_CHILD (custodian-executed), accept index k only if all 0..k-1 are already committed." "policy_id": "POLICY.TURN_ORDER.STRICT.V1" - "meaning": "Any priced event must commit a SHA256 of anchor tuple (id, ts, price, url)." "policy_id": "POLICY.PRICE.ANCHOR.COMMIT.V1" - "meaning": "Require quarterly royalty report; allow random audit selection up to 2% per quarter." "policy_id": "POLICY.ROYALTY.QUARTERLY_REPORTING.AUDIT_2PCT.V1" - "meaning": "Pin vault_default to ed25519-only; allow per-entry override." "policy_id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.ED25519.V1" - "meaning": "Pin vault_default to pqc-only(dilithium3); allow per-entry override." "policy_id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.PQC.V1" - "meaning": "Pin vault_default to dual(ed25519,dilithium3); allow per-entry override." "policy_id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.DUAL.V1" "usage": "example": "imports": - "policy_hash": "sha256:<fill>" "policy_id": "POLICY.TURN_ORDER.STRICT.V1" - "policy_hash": "sha256:<fill>" "policy_id": "POLICY.WITNESS.MIN3.DIVERSE.V1" - "policy_hash": "sha256:<fill>" "policy_id": "POLICY.PRICE.ANCHOR.COMMIT.V1" "vault_logic": "1.0" "import_model": "A child Vault Logic may reference one or more macros by (policy_id, policy_hash). Import = textual inclusion at build-time; validation remains deterministic." "RootZero01900302_POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OFF_BY_DEFAULT.V1": "ai_signing": "default": "OFF" "override_mechanism": "local_flag_only" "audit_mode": "pre_commit_check" "description": "Default policy to disallow AI-signed entries unless an explicit override is enabled in Vault Logic. Prevents silent inclusion of AI-generated or AI-endorsed attestations without human oversight." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "SIGNATURE" - "WITNESS" - "VALIDATOR_CONFIRM" "reason": "Maintain human accountability by default" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OFF_BY_DEFAULT.V1" "logic_profile": "ai_signing_control" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900303_POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OPT_IN_WITH_FLAG.V1": "ai_signing": "default": "OFF" "enable_condition": "local_toggle:true" "human_co_sign_required": true "audit_mode": "co_sign_trace" "description": "Allows AI-signed entries only when an explicit flag is set AND at least one human co-signer is present. Ensures AI logic is never the sole authority in sensitive attestations." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "VALIDATOR_CONFIRM" - "CO_SIGN" - "EXECUTOR_SIGN" "rationale": "Prevent unsupervised AI actions in binding vault decisions" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.AI.SIGNING.OPT_IN_WITH_FLAG.V1" "logic_profile": "ai_opt_in_with_human" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900304_AIAuditMacro": "ai_signing": "co_sign_required": true "default": "OFF" "toggleable": true "audit_mode": "full_trace" "description": "Enable AI co-signing only when paired with full, traceable audit logs. AI never acts alone; human validators may override or reject AI entries." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "AI_COSIGN" - "AUTOGENERATED_ENTRY" "rationale": "Allow AI augmentation while preserving human accountability and traceability" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.AI.COSIGN.AUDITED.V1" "logic_profile": "ai_traceable_audit" "override_model": "ai_rejection_allowed": true "human_validator_priority": true "quorum_required": 1 "validator_required": true "RootZero01900305_AIRestrictedMacro": "ai_access": "REJECT" "ai_audit_allowed": false "ai_interaction_log": "ENABLED" "ai_signing": "OFF" "audit_mode": "freeze_confirm" "description": "Restrict or disallow AI access and signing. Useful for human-only, sensitive vaults or those under strict regulatory rules." "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.AI.ACCESS.RESTRICTED.V1" "logic_profile": "ai_restricted_access" "quorum_required": 2 "validator_required": true "RootZero01900306_InheritanceMacro": "ai_signing": "OFF" "audit_mode": "on_commit" "description": "Equal-share inheritance where heirs are predefined and succession is triggered by a single event (death or incapacity)." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "SUCCESSION" - "SHARE_ASSIGNMENT" "notes": "Ideal for nuclear families or single-jurisdiction estates." "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.SUCCESSION.EQUAL_SHARE.V1" "logic_profile": "equal_share_succession" "quorum_required": 1 "share_distribution": "allow_renunciation": true "fallback": "estate_retains_share" "model": "equal" "succession_trigger": "days_until_trigger": 45 "event": "death_or_incapacity" "method": "deadman_switch" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900307_EmergencySuccessionMacro": "audit_mode": "trigger_override_review" "description": "Urgent succession activation when the primary executor is missing, incapacitated, or legally restrained. Allows predefined backup executor to trigger inheritance with safeguards." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "SUCCESSION" - "VAULT_TRANSFER" "rationale": "Ensure safe, controlled transition under executor failure scenarios" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.SUCCESSION.EMERGENCY_TRIGGER.V1" "logic_profile": "emergency_triggered_succession" "override_protection": "dispute_resolution_window_hours": 48 "validator_quorum_required": 2 "succession_trigger": "backup_cvid": "CVID_EXEC_BACKUP" "backup_executor_allowed": true "conditions": - "non_response > 72h" - "legal_restriction_flag = true" - "ai_risk_override_detected = true" "event": "executor_failure" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900308_MultiJurisdictionInheritanceMacro": "arbitration_model": "override_allowed": true "override_mechanism": "consensus_only" "type": "joint_review" "audit_mode": "cross_jurisdiction_trace" "description": "Inheritance spanning multiple legal systems. Dual-jurisdiction logic, validator co-approval, and override reconciliation ensure compliance across regions." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "SUCCESSION" - "ARBITRATION" - "VAULT_LOCK" "rationale": "Balance multi-regional law while protecting inheritance rights" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.SUCCESSION.MULTI_JURISDICTION.V1" "jurisdictions": "primary": "CIVIL_LAW" "secondary": "COMMON_LAW" "logic_profile": "dual_jurisdiction_succession" "succession_model": "fallback_on_conflict": "registry_pause" "quorum_required": 2 "trigger_event": "executor_death_or_dispute" "validator_required": true "validators": - "cvid": "CVID_VALIDATOR_CIVIL" "role": "validator_primary" - "cvid": "CVID_VALIDATOR_COMMON" "role": "validator_secondary" "RootZero01900309_POLICY.WITNESS.MIN3.DIVERSE.V1": "ai_signing": "OFF" "audit_mode": "on_submit" "description": "Enforce witness diversity: at least three attestors from ≥3 institutions and ≥2 jurisdictions." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "SUCCESSION" - "VAULT_TRANSFER" - "CRITICAL_CLAIM" "override_allowed": false "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.WITNESS.MIN3.DIVERSE.V1" "logic_profile": "witness_diversity_enforcement" "requirements": "minimum_institutions": 3 "minimum_jurisdictions": 2 "minimum_witnesses": 3 "validator_required": true "RootZero01900310_POLICY.TURN_ORDER.STRICT.V1": "audit_mode": "pre_commit_validation" "description": "Strict sequential execution for turn-based events. Accept index k only if all prior entries (0..k-1) are committed and validated. Applies to custodian-executed MINT_CHILD and similar ordered sequences." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "MINT_CHILD" - "CLAIM_SEQUENCE" - "SUCCESSION" "rationale": "Ensure linear history; prevent retroactive manipulation" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.TURN_ORDER.STRICT.V1" "logic_profile": "turn_sequencing_enforcement" "turn_ordering": "mode": "strict" "reject_on_missing_prior": true "rule": "no gaps in sequence" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900311_POLICY.PRICE.ANCHOR.COMMIT.V1": "audit_mode": "anchor_verify" "description": "Any transaction with pricing/valuation must include a cryptographic anchor tuple (id, timestamp, price, url) committed via SHA256. See RootZero017002_AnchorVsMedium for daily Au fixing and RootZero015004_RegistryEntryTemplate for Registry anchoring." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "SALE" - "TRANSFER" - "ROYALTY_DISTRIBUTION" "rationale": "Ensure pricing integrity; provide tamper-evident valuation anchors" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.PRICE.ANCHOR.COMMIT.V1" "logic_profile": "price_anchor_commit" "pricing_commitment": "anchor_fields": - "id" - "timestamp" - "price" - "url" "hash_function": "SHA256" "requirement": "mandatory_on_price_tagged_entries" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900312_POLICY.ROYALTY.QUARTERLY_REPORTING.AUDIT_2PCT.V1": "aliases": - "POLICY.ROYALTY.ANNUAL_REPORTING.AUDIT_2PCT.V1" - "POLICY.ROYALTY.ANNUAL.REPORTING.AUDIT2PCT.V1" "audit_mode": "sample_trigger" "audit_rules": "max_audit_percent": 2 "override_protection": true "selection_method": "random_weighted" "description": "Mandate quarterly royalty reporting; allow up to 2% of deeds to be randomly selected for validator-initiated audit each quarter. Matches RootZero017007_Royalties." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "ROYALTY_DISTRIBUTION" - "REVENUE_REPORT" "rationale": "Encourage transparency and prevent misuse of royalty pathways" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.ROYALTY.QUARTERLY_REPORTING.AUDIT_2PCT.V1" "logic_profile": "royalty_reporting_and_audit" "reporting": "frequency": "quarterly" "required_fields": - "total_revenue" - "distribution_log" - "recipient_breakdown" "submission_deadline": "End of quarter + 30 days" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900313_OpenLicenseMacro": "access_control": "license_type": "CC-BY-4.0" "restrictions": "none" "visibility": "public" "audit_mode": "public_indexed" "description": "Publish vault contents under a permissive open license with attribution. Global read access; no proprietary claims." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "VAULT" - "VAULT_LOGIC" - "JOURNAL" "rationale": "Support knowledge-sharing with attribution integrity" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.LICENSING.OPEN.CC_BY_4_0.V1" "logic_profile": "public_read_permissive" "validation_model": "post_commit_review": true "validator_acknowledgment_required": false "RootZero01900314_ReadOnlyMacro": "access_control": "mode": "read_only" "new_entries_allowed": false "post_finalization_edits": false "audit_mode": "freeze_confirm" "description": "Enforce strict read-only access to all vault content after finalization. Ideal for historical archives, completed deeds, or frozen registries." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "VAULT" - "JOURNAL" - "CUSTODY" "rationale": "Protect integrity of sealed or archived vault states" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.VAULT.READ_ONLY.V1" "logic_profile": "vault_immutable_finalized" "validator_required": true "RootZero01900315_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_ED25519_V1": "description": "Default signature policy that pins vault_default to ed25519-only; allows explicit per-entry override." "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.ED25519.V1" "set": "signature_policy_defaults": "allowed_pqc_algs": - "dilithium3" "override_per_journal_entry": true "vault_default": "ed25519-only" "RootZero01900316_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_PQC_V1": "description": "Default signature policy that pins vault_default to pqc-only (dilithium3); allows explicit per-entry override." "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.PQC.V1" "set": "signature_policy_defaults": "allowed_pqc_algs": - "dilithium3" "override_per_journal_entry": true "vault_default": "pqc-only(dilithium3)" "RootZero01900317_POLICY_SIGNATURE_POLICY_DEFAULT_DUAL_V1": "description": "Default signature policy that pins vault_default to dual (ed25519 + dilithium3); allows explicit per-entry override." "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "id": "POLICY.SIGNATURE_POLICY.DEFAULT.DUAL.V1" "set": "signature_policy_defaults": "allowed_pqc_algs": - "dilithium3" "override_per_journal_entry": true "vault_default": "dual" "RootZero01900318_DisputeResolutionMacros": "description": "Canonical dispute-resolution macros. Decisions bind as Journal events with Registry settlement where applicable." "macros": - "audit_mode": "staged_review" "description": "Three-stage escalation path ensuring fairness and continuity of resolution." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "ARBITRATION" - "DISPUTE" - "SUCCESSION" "rationale": "Ensure escalation closes disputes without silent reversals" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "logic_profile": "escalation_path" "name": "EscalationPath_3Stage" "outcome": "First-valid-wins under Thin law. Results bind in Journal with references to the supporting ContinuityBundle." "stages": - "Local validator review with required quorum and diversity." - "Cross-jurisdiction arbitration by independent validators." - "Root Zero structural recomputation as final audit." "validator_required": true - "audit_mode": "arbitration_review" "description": "Canonical arbitration panel model ensuring neutrality and diversity." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "ARBITRATION" - "DISPUTE" "rationale": "Prevent conflicts of interest and ensure global legitimacy" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "logic_profile": "neutral_arbitration" "name": "NeutralArbitration_Panel" "outcome": "Decision becomes enforceable upon Registry settlement when value moves." "quorum_required": 3 "rules": - "Arbitrators must be outside the dispute lineage and free of conflict." - "Quorum is three to five arbitrators from diverse jurisdictions." - "Decision is recorded as a Journal entry with evidence references." "validator_required": true - "audit_mode": "appeal_trace" "description": "Structured appeal protocol with clear closure at Root Zero." "enforcement_scope": "applies_to": - "ARBITRATION" - "DISPUTE" - "SUCCESSION" "hash": "sha256:<to-be-calculated>" "logic_profile": "appeal_protocol" "name": "AppealProtocol" "outcome": "Case is closed upon final recomputation. No silent reversals; all outcomes remain append-only." "rules": - "Any party may appeal with a fresh ContinuityBundle and explicit error codes." - "Appeals must cite specific ValidatorErrorCodes and new material proof." - "Final escalation closes at Root Zero recomputation." "validator_required": true "RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy": "RootZero020001_Description": "The Validation Policy defines the full taxonomy of canonical reject codes used by validators across all Deeds, Journals, and the Registry. Each code represents a deterministic failure state. Validators MUST enforce these codes with zero discretion. If an event violates a predicate or structural rule, the corresponding code is raised and the event is rejected." "RootZero020002_EnforcementRules": - "Determinism": "Validators must apply reject codes strictly, without runtime negotiation." - "Canonical Scope: >- Only codes listed here are valid; ad-hoc error strings are not permitted." - "Dual Logging: >- Each rejection is written to the local Journal and, if public, to the Registry. Warnings are logged but do not reject." - "Severity": "Codes prefixed with \"E-\" are hard rejections; codes prefixed with \"W-\" are warnings and never reject." - "Namespaces": "Canonical runtime codes are limited to the E-*/W-* namespace defined here. AI training/meta domains (e.g., ADES-01, LEDGER-02, ECON-03, SIG-04) are NON-RUNTIME labels and MUST NOT be emitted by validators. See RootZero0211_AIValidationDomains for those mappings." "RootZero020003_RejectCodes": - "code": "E-AI" "failure_modes": "Failures of AI attestations, unverifiable AI outputs, erased or tampered AI audit trails, or AI actions outside authorized legal/ethical predicates." "scope": "AI Governance & Accountability" - "code": "E-AUTH" "failure_modes": "Unauthorized keys, invalid origin proofs, missing signatures, fraudulent attestations, unverified ownership claims, unauthorized integrations, or joining violations." "scope": "Authentication & Origin" - "code": "E-CANON" "failure_modes": "Invalid formatting (NFC, sorted keys), tampered records, structural drift, attempted rewrites, misalignment to core principles, non-deterministic rules, discretionary policy violations, or failure to recompute canonical proofs." "scope": "Canonicalization & thin law" - "code": "E-CHAIN" "failure_modes": "Broken parent_hash links, out-of-order entries, missing ancestry, recomputation failures, tampered audit logs, or disrupted lineage." "scope": "Continuity & Lineage" - "code": "E-DEL" "failure_modes": "Delegations that violate thresholds, consent requirements, or qualifications encoded in Vault Logic." "scope": "Delegation" - "code": "E-DUPE" "failure_modes": "Attempted duplication of a unique Deed identifier or issuance." "scope": "Duplication" - "code": "E-FINAL" "failure_modes": "Violations of the first-valid-wins rule; re-attempted actions after deterministic consensus or finalized rulings/transactions." "scope": "Finality" - "code": "E-FORGE" "failure_modes": "Forged CVIDs, false identities, counterfeit attestations, or detected fraud attempts." "scope": "Forgery" - "code": "E-JST" "failure_modes": "Violations of jurisdiction-specific rules, machine-enforceable laws, judicial enforcement failures, or failure to execute corrective actions." "scope": "Jurisdiction & Legal Compliance" - "code": "E-PRIV" "failure_modes": "Unauthorized data access, leakage, misuse during audit, or violations of declared privacy predicates." "scope": "Privacy" - "code": "E-REV" "failure_modes": "Unauthorized or abusive revocations, invalid membership expulsions, or offboarding attempts without proper predicates." "scope": "Revocation" - "code": "E-RISK" "failure_modes": "Failures in threat detection, anomaly handling, containment procedures, recovery protocols, or mitigation policies." "scope": "Risk & Containment" - "code": "E-ROYALTY" "failure_modes": "Underreporting revenue, discrepancies in royalty declarations, failure to remit fees, or violations of incentive/reward distribution rules." "scope": "Royalty & Rewards" - "code": "E-SCOPE" "failure_modes": "Actions outside a Deed's declared scope, unauthorized integrations, violations of declared topology, or actors exceeding authority limits." "scope": "Boundary & Scope" - "code": "E-SEC" "failure_modes": "Breaches of reciprocal security assurances or violations of explicitly declared security commitments." "scope": "Security Commitments" - "code": "E-SIG" "failure_modes": "Signature mismatches, tampered message_digests, or unauthorized signatures." "scope": "Signature Integrity" - "code": "E-SIG-POLICY" "failure_modes": "Signature presented does not satisfy declared signature_policy (e.g., dual required but only one present)." "scope": "Signature Policy" - "code": "E-PQC" "failure_modes": "PQC verification failure (e.g., dilithium3 invalid), missing PQC half in dual mode, or incompatible PQC algorithm." "scope": "Post-Quantum Signature Integrity" - "code": "E-SOC" "failure_modes": "Violations of encoded cultural, ethical, journalistic, or social predicates (e.g., journalism ethics, cultural safeguards, feedback protocols)." "scope": "Social & Cultural" - "code": "E-SUCC" "failure_modes": "Unauthorized or invalid succession events, missing attestations, or succession processes that violate Vault Logic." "scope": "Succession" - "code": "E-TRADE" "failure_modes": "Violations of fair exchange or market maker rules encoded in Vault Logic." "scope": "Trade & Market Rules" - "code": "E-WIT" "failure_modes": "Failures of quorum, invalid witness attestations, insufficient reputation, or missing witness testimony." "scope": "Witness" - "code": "E-WIT-DIV" "failure_modes": "Failure to meet required diversity thresholds across witness classes (geo, org, tier)." "scope": "Witness Diversity" - "code": "E-ANCHOR" "failure_modes": "Missing or invalid price anchor tuple (id, timestamp, price, url), mismatched daily fixing hash, or failed Registry anchoring." "scope": "Anchoring & Pricing Integrity" - "code": "E-TURN" "failure_modes": "Non-monotonic timestamps, missing indices, or turn-order mode violations (strict, first-valid-wins, timestamp-priority)." "scope": "Turn Order & Time" - "code": "E-NONTURING" "failure_modes": "Vault Logic fails non-Turing constraints (infinite loops, unbounded recursion, cycles) or uses disallowed constructs." "scope": "Vault Logic Sanity" - "code": "E-MINT-AUTH" "failure_modes": "MINT attempted by a non-custodian actor or without Root Zero authority; missing custodian license proof." "scope": "Minting Authority" - "code": "E-PATH-SELL" "failure_modes": "Buyer attempted to bypass the nearest sold ancestor seller along the prefix path." "scope": "Commercialization Path" - "code": "E-PREMINT-NOT-SET" "failure_modes": "Required ancestor was not pre-minted as \"Minted, Available for Purchase\" before minting a descendant Sub-ID." "scope": "Commercialization Prerequisites" - "code": "W-WARN" "failure_modes": "Signals of potential structural risks or anomalies that require audit attention but do not reject." "scope": "Warning (Non-Rejection)" "RootZero020004_ValidatorErrorCodes": "codes": - "code": "ERR_INVALID_SIGNATURE" "meaning": "Signature is missing or cryptographically invalid." - "code": "ERR_UNDECLARED_POLICY" "meaning": "Action attempted without declared signature_policy." - "code": "ERR_SIGNATURE_POLICY_MISMATCH" "meaning": "Presented signatures do not satisfy the declared signature_policy." - "code": "ERR_PQC_VERIFICATION" "meaning": "PQC (e.g., dilithium3) verification failed or required PQC half missing in dual mode." - "code": "ERR_SCOPE_OVERFLOW" "meaning": "Claim exceeds declared scope or authority." - "code": "ERR_DUPLICATE_ENTRY" "meaning": "Replay or duplication of a Journal or Registry entry detected." - "code": "ERR_BOUNDARY_VIOLATION" "meaning": "Claim crosses a forbidden jurisdiction or scope boundary." - "code": "ERR_DATA_TAMPER" "meaning": "Canonical hash mismatch; payload not identical to declared bytes." - "code": "ERR_NON_PAYMENT" "meaning": "Floor or royalty obligations unmet where due." - "code": "ERR_TURN_ORDER" "meaning": "Turn-order or monotonic time violation." - "code": "ERR_ANCHOR_MISSING" "meaning": "Missing/mismatched price anchor or fixing hash." - "code": "ERR_MINT_AUTH" "meaning": "Minting attempted without Root Zero/Licensed Custodian authority." - "code": "ERR_SELL_PATH_VIOLATION" "meaning": "Attempt to bypass nearest sold ancestor seller." - "code": "ERR_PREMINT_REQUIRED" "meaning": "Required ancestor not pre-minted as \"Minted, Available for Purchase\"." - "code": "ERR_UNAUTHORIZED_ACTOR" "meaning": "Actor lacks a verifiable Deed or proof of authority." - "code": "ERR_POLICY_CONFLICT" "meaning": "Proposed action contradicts immutable thin law." "description": "Canonical error codes for validator enforcement. Every rejection must cite one of these codes. Truth remains structural and explicit." "RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist": "RootZero021001_Description": "Deterministic validator enforcement rules. Every acceptance or rejection must cite a canonical reject code (see RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy). This ensures machine determinism and auditable enforcement across all Deeds. AI training/meta domains may be attached to steps for explainability (see RootZero0211_AIValidationDomains); they are non-runtime hints." "RootZero021002_Steps": - "action": "Canonicalize (NFC, sorted keys)" "name": "Normalize Input" "reject": "E-CANON" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Derive CVID from canonicalized input" "name": "Compute Identifier" "reject": "E-CANON" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Check ed25519 / pqc (dilithium3) against declared policy" "name": "Verify Signatures" "reject": "E-AUTH, E-SIG, E-PQC, E-SIG-POLICY" "training_domains": - "SIG-04" - "action": "Validate presence and satisfaction of signature_policy (ed25519-only, pqc-only, dual)" "name": "Enforce Signature Policy" "reject": "E-SIG-POLICY, E-PQC" "training_domains": - "SIG-04" - "action": "Validate declared scope against Vault Logic predicates" "name": "Enforce Scope" "reject": "E-SCOPE" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Ensure CVID uniqueness" "name": "Prevent Duplication" "reject": "E-DUPE" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Check parent_hash, ancestry, and hash chain recomputation" "name": "Verify Continuity" "reject": "E-CHAIN" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Enforce configured mode (first-valid-wins, strict-monotonic, timestamp-priority)" "name": "Turn Order" "reject": "E-TURN" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Validate delegation thresholds and consent requirements" "name": "Authority & Delegation" "reject": "E-DEL" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "If event_type=MINT or MINT_CHILD, require Licensed Custodian proof and Root Zero authority" "name": "Minting Authority" "reject": "E-MINT-AUTH" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Enforce nearest sold ancestor seller; require pre-mint flag where needed" "name": "Commercialization Path" "reject": "E-PATH-SELL, E-PREMINT-NOT-SET" "training_domains": - "ECON-03" - "action": "Verify M-of-N quorum and diversity thresholds" "name": "Witness Quorum" "reject": "E-WIT, E-WIT-DIV" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Require anchor tuple (id, timestamp, price, url) and match daily Au fixing hash" "name": "Price Anchor & Fixing" "reject": "E-ANCHOR" "training_domains": - "ADES-01" - "ECON-03" - "action": "Enforce Vault Logic privacy predicates" "name": "Privacy Protection" "reject": "E-PRIV" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Verify jurisdiction_ref and enforce legal predicates" "name": "Jurisdiction & Legal Compliance" "reject": "E-JST" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Validate revocation or expulsion events" "name": "Revocation Checks" "reject": "E-REV" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Validate succession events per Vault Logic predicates" "name": "Succession Rules" "reject": "E-SUCC" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Validate royalties, fees, and distribution commitments" "name": "Economic & Royalty Checks" "reject": "E-ROYALTY, E-TRADE" "training_domains": - "ECON-03" - "action": "Evaluate anomaly signals and containment protocols" "name": "Threat Detection" "reject": "E-RISK" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" "warn": "W-WARN" - "action": "Apply first-valid-wins rule" "name": "Finality Enforcement" "reject": "E-FINAL" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Enforce mutual security agreements" "name": "Security Commitments" "reject": "E-SEC" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Enforce encoded cultural, ethical, or journalism rules" "name": "Social & Cultural Compliance" "reject": "E-SOC" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" - "action": "Validate AI attestations, outputs, and audit trails" "name": "AI Governance" "reject": "E-AI" "training_domains": - "SIG-04" - "action": "Canonicalize artifacts; rebuild Journal via parent_hash; recompute Registry ADES balances; verify signatures per declared policy (ed25519-only, pqc-only, or dual); compare computed state_hash to expected." "name": "Offline Recomputation (ContinuityBundle)" "reject": "E-CHAIN, E-CANON, E-AUTH, E-SIG, E-PQC, E-SIG-POLICY" "training_domains": - "ADES-01" - "LEDGER-02" - "SIG-04" - "action": "Ensure hash-linked Journal/Registry immutability" "name": "Record Preservation" "reject": "E-CHAIN, E-CANON" "training_domains": - "LEDGER-02" "RootZero021003_Note": "All reject codes must align with the consolidated glossary in RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy. No validator path may invent ad hoc codes outside that list. AI training/meta domain labels (see RootZero0211_AIValidationDomains) are optional annotations for explainability only and MUST NOT be emitted as runtime reject codes." "RootZero0211_AIValidationDomains": "RootZero021101_Description": "Defines AI training and meta-validation domains used for machine learning and validator simulations. These domains group related canonical reject codes and logical predicates under structured heuristics for explainability, clustering, and automated reasoning. They are **not runtime reject codes** — they are meta labels for validator cognition, internal reasoning chains, and structured self-evaluation. AI validators may use these codes for learning, clustering, or feedback alignment but MUST NOT emit them in canonical Journals or Registries." "RootZero021102_Domains": - "code": "ADES-01" "domain": "Accounting & Double-Entry Structure" "maps_to": - "E-CHAIN" - "E-CANON" - "E-ROYALTY" - "E-ANCHOR" "purpose": "Trains AI validators to understand mirrored double-entry consistency between Journal (local) and Registry (global). Reinforces structural accounting equivalence and reconciliation under the ADES model. Detects asymmetry between local and public entries." - "code": "LEDGER-02" "domain": "Ledger & Lineage Integrity" "maps_to": - "E-CHAIN" - "E-FINAL" - "E-TURN" - "E-CANON" "purpose": "Reinforces structural comprehension of chronological order, turn-order, and parent_hash lineage. Teaches AI how to reason deterministically about sequence, ancestry, and immutable hash linkage." - "code": "ECON-03" "domain": "Economic Validity & Fair Exchange" "maps_to": - "E-ROYALTY" - "E-TRADE" - "E-ANCHOR" "purpose": "Enables reasoning over economic fairness, floor adherence, and royalty or price anchor verification. Detects improper bypass of authorized sellers or royalty shortfall in revenue trails." - "code": "SIG-04" "domain": "Signature & Attestation Logic" "maps_to": - "E-SIG" - "E-SIG-POLICY" - "E-AUTH" - "E-PQC" "purpose": "Trains AI to audit cryptographic attestations, dual-signature requirements, and proof completeness. Builds recognition of when a transaction is authentic, complete, and policy-aligned." "RootZero021103_UsageRules": - "These domains are exclusively for AI validator simulation and reasoning trace clustering." - "Each training domain must map to one or more canonical E-/W- codes." - "Domain mappings must remain static across protocol versions for continuity." - "AI models must not emit domain labels in Journals, Registries, or Validator APIs." - "Domain references may be used internally in training datasets, dashboards, or QA audits." "RootZero021104_Notes": "The AI Validation Domains act as bridges between human interpretability and deterministic enforcement. They define how AI tools cluster reasoning steps, produce explainable validation chains, and preserve epistemic transparency without violating Vault immutability." "RootZero0220_ConversionRules": "RootZero022001_Description": "Conversion rules define how identifiers (IDs) are translated into numeric coordinates for validation, ordering, and proof. Each ID resolves to multiple coordinates:\n\n - Global Coordinate (canonical): derived from Unicode scalar values after NFC normalization.\n - >-\n Local Coordinate (tenant): derived from a tenant-declared symbol subset.\n\nConversion is not subjective. It is deterministic, reversible, and independently verifiable. To guarantee reversibility for variable-length IDs, Root Zero uses a zero-free digit encoding: every symbol digit is shifted by +1 and a reserved digit 0 is never emitted." "RootZero022002_CoordinateSystems": "global_coordinate": "digit_rule": "Let B be the cardinality of the symbol domain. Encode each symbol u as digit d = rank(u) + 1 ∈ {1,...,B}. Reserve digit 0 (never used for admissible IDs). Use numeric base b = B + 1." "numeric_base": "B_plus_1" "purpose": "- Canonical ordering across languages and symbol sets. - >-\n Proof-grade conversion that can be recomputed offline." "symbol_domain": "Unicode scalar values (post-NFC; excludes surrogate code points)" "value_formula": "For ID = u1...un, define:\n v = Σ_{i=1..n} d_i × b^(n-i)\nwhere d_i = rank(u_i) + 1 and b = B + 1." "width_rule": "Width n may be carried explicitly (recommended in proofs), and is also recoverable from v alone because all emitted digits are nonzero (no leading-zero digits in base b)." "local_coordinate": "digit_rule": "Let Σ_T have size k with published bijection rank_T: Σ_T → {0,...,k-1}. Encode each symbol a as digit d = rank_T(a) + 1 ∈ {1,...,k}. Reserve digit 0. Use numeric base b = k + 1." "guarantees": - "Σ_T and rank_T MUST be published in Vault Logic at or before issuance." - "No post-hoc redefinition permitted." "numeric_base": "k_plus_1" "symbol_domain": "Tenant-declared subset Σ_T" "value_formula": "For ID = a1...an, define:\n v_T = Σ_{i=1..n} d_i × b^(n-i)\nwhere d_i = rank_T(a_i) + 1 and b = k + 1." "RootZero022003_ConversionProperties": "properties": - "Deterministic": "same normalized ID yields same coordinate." - "Reversible": "decode by repeated div/mod in base b, then subtract 1 and apply rank^{-1}." - "Infrastructure-independent": "recomputable without databases if the domain + rank are published." - "Canonicalization-required": "IDs MUST be NFC-normalized before conversion." "RootZero022004_ValidationRequirements": - "Every ID MUST resolve to a valid global coordinate under the global rules." - "Local coordinates are valid only if Σ_T and rank_T are published in Vault Logic." - "Coordinate proofs MAY be included in a ContinuityBundle (recommended for long-horizon audit)." - "All canonicalization MUST use Unicode NFC." - "Proof artifacts MUST be signed under the vault’s declared signature policy." "RootZero022005_Examples": "examples": - "global_coordinate": "base": "B+1" "digits": - "rank(L)+1" - "rank(O)+1" - "rank(V)+1" - "rank(E)+1" "value": "Σ d_i × (B+1)^(n-i)" "id": "LOVE" - "global_coordinate": "base": "B+1" "digits": - "rank(I)+1" - "rank(❤️)+1" - "rank(U)+1" "value": "Σ d_i × (B+1)^(n-i)" "id": "I ❤️ U" "note": "Examples illustrate the formula; actual numeric values depend on the published rank function." "RootZero022006_ContinuityAndCourtroomProof": "bundling": "Coordinate proofs may be bundled with Deeds, Journals, and Registries in ContinuityBundles for offline recomputation or legal testimony." "verification": - "Canonicalize ID string (Unicode NFC)." - "Apply the published rank function and numeric base." - "Recompute digits (rank+1), then recompute v by the formula." - "Optionally decode v back to the symbol sequence and confirm exact match." - "Hash and sign the proof outcome under the declared signature policy." "RootZero022007_LandlordTone": "No ID floats unmoored. Each reduces to a number — blunt, irreversible, unavoidable.\nCoordinates are not decorations. They are the proof beneath the poetry.\nAnd proof, once signed, obeys the vault’s declared signature law." "RootZero0230_TrainingAndValidation": "RootZero023001_Purpose": "Train validators and AI agents to apply structure-first validation with strict caps and deterministic scoring. Outcomes must be reproducible offline, aligned to thin law, and enforceable via canonical reject codes." "RootZero023002_Structure": "enforcement": - "Strict structural caps when any requirement is missing (role, timestamp, quiz, reuse, length)." - "No hallucinated validation or praise; praise is permitted only after structural validation." - "Training domains (ADES-01, LEDGER-02, ECON-03, SIG-04) may be used as non-runtime pedagogical tags. They map to canonical runtime reject codes per RootZero0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping." "sections": - "Validation (with quoted evidence)" - "Rubric scoring (50-point)" - "Metrics" - "Session breakdown" - "Strengths" - "Growth areas" - "Coaching feedback" "RootZero023003_QuestionsCorpus": "description": "This corpus binds human learners and AI agents to the Vault discipline. Every question maps 1:1 to the 240 stages of the six-phase framework (40 per phase). References are canonical and must resolve to existing sections." "promise": "No gaps. Every stage is interrogated. Every answer must be in spec." "purpose": "ai_agents": "Reason strictly within canonical structures (RootZero0100_FrontDoor, RootZero0130_Constitution, RootZero0140_FieldTypes, RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure, RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy, RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist, RootZero0220_ConversionRules, RootZero02_Journal, RootZero03_PublicAccountingRegistry, RootZero0240_Specimens, RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption)." "humans": "Master RSBIS as constitutional text and technical system using the same canonical references." "study_and_compliance_instruction": "You must read the Root Zero Vault (RSBIS) as both a constitutional text and a\ntechnical specification, and answer as a canonical validator — not merely an explainer.\n\n\nPROGRESSION & SCOPE (NON-NEGOTIABLE)\nWork strictly in order through the 240 questions in RootZero0230_TrainingAndValidation; do not\ninvent, skip, merge, or reorder questions. When asked “next 8,” answer the next eight\nstages in sequence.\n\n\nEXEMPLARS\nOnly use specimens from RootZero0240_Specimens for exemplars. If no suitable specimen exists:\nlearn the standard structure, language, and style of RootZero0240_Specimens and produce a clearly\nlabeled “Specimen — New (Not in RootZero0240_Specimens)” as a local example in your answer. Never\nclaim it is part of RootZero0240_Specimens or update RootZero0240_Specimens.\n\n\nGROUNDING REQUIREMENT\nCite exact sections by name and subsection (RootZero0100_FrontDoor, RootZero0130_Constitution,\nRootZero0140_FieldTypes, RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure, RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy,\nRootZero0210_ValidationChecklist, RootZero0220_ConversionRules, RootZero02_Journal,\nRootZero03_PublicAccountingRegistry, RootZero0240_Specimens, RootZero0170_EconomicsAndAdoption).\nAny equation, YAML, or logic must derive from or be explicitly consistent with the spec.\nIf the spec is silent on a detail, write “Not in spec” and stop.\n\n\nREQUIRED ANSWER STRUCTURE\n1. High-Level Principle — the structural rule at stake.\n2. Canonical Reference — quote/cite the exact section/code/commandment.\n3. Technical Logic/Equation — e.g., canonicalize → CVID → append.\n4. Minimal YAML Example — canonical block demonstrating the rule.\n5. Validator Perspective — how a validator enforces/rejects; include error codes if defined.\n6. Limitations — explicitly flag out-of-scope items (“Not in spec”).\n\n\nHARD CONSTRAINTS (DOCTRINE CHECKS)\nADES: Use only for the specific transactions authorized by the Vault and only\nwith the one public Registry included in Root Zero’s Vault.\n\n\nDouble-Entry (Dr/Cr) across scopes: All actions require a local Journal entry\ninside the Deed’s Vault. Actions that the spec requires to be reported publicly\nmust also have a second entry in the public Registry via ADES. Together, the\nlocal Journal entry and the Registry entry form the cross-ledger double-entry.\n\n\nEconomics: Derivative income reporting (including leases) applies as specified;\nTrunks are explicitly waived per the economics section.\n\n\nSignature Policy: Enforce ed25519-only, pqc-only (e.g., dilithium3), or dual\nas declared by the entry. Omission in dual = rejection.\n\n\nSELF-VALIDATION\nEnd with a self-rating (0–10) and justification vs. canonical text.\nAbsolute requirement: every answer must be 10/10. If not 10, keep correcting\nwithin the same response; do not proceed." "study_protocol": "steps": - "Study the Root Zero Vault (RSBIS) as both constitutional text and technical specification." - "Receive a question tied to a specific phase and stage." - "Answer using the Study & Compliance Instruction; do not proceed until the answer meets the 10/10 bar." - "Self-correct within the same response until fully grounded (10/10) with exact section references." - "Include minimal canonical YAML examples and validator logic where applicable." - "End every answer with a self-rating (0–10) and a one-sentence justification rooted in canonical text." - "Repeat strictly in sequence until all 240 stages are completed (8 at a time)." "RootZero023004_GradingRubric": "dimensions": "correctness_alignment": "All claims cite correct sections; zero invention." "exemplar_use": "RootZero0240_Specimens used when available; if absent, “Specimen — New (Not in RootZero0240_Specimens)” produced and clearly labeled." "limitations": "Out-of-scope items halted with “Not in spec”." "minimal_yaml": "Small, canonical, compiling YAML that reflects the spec." "self_validation": "Ends with justified 10/10 or self-corrections to reach it." "structural_compliance": "Required 6-part structure present; sequence respected." "validator_logic": "Enforcement path and reject conditions are explicit." "pass_rule": "All dimensions must be Met; otherwise, correct within the same answer." "RootZero0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping": "description": "Training/meta domain labels are for pedagogy and clustering only; they MUST NOT be emitted by validators. Every domain maps to canonical runtime reject codes defined in RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy." "domains": - "domain": "ADES-01" "note": "Double-entry symmetry (Journal↔Registry), canonical anchoring, and priced event integrity." "runtime_maps": - "E-CHAIN" - "E-CANON" - "E-ROYALTY" - "E-ANCHOR" - "domain": "LEDGER-02" "note": "Lineage, parent_hash continuity, turn-order, and immutable sequence/finality checks." "runtime_maps": - "E-CHAIN" - "E-FINAL" - "E-TURN" - "E-CANON" - "domain": "ECON-03" "note": "Economic floors/royalties, price anchors, and commercialization path enforcement." "runtime_maps": - "E-ROYALTY" - "E-TRADE" - "E-ANCHOR" - "E-PATH-SELL" - "E-PREMINT-NOT-SET" - "domain": "SIG-04" "note": "Signature validity, policy satisfaction (ed25519-only/pqc-only/dual), and PQC verification." "runtime_maps": - "E-SIG" - "E-SIG-POLICY" - "E-AUTH" - "E-PQC" "RootZero023005_ErrorCodesExamples": "examples": - "code": "ADES-01" "name": "Unpermitted ADES Use" "reason": "Attempted ADES outside the specific authorized transactions or outside the one public Registry." - "code": "LEDGER-02" "name": "Missing Cross-Ledger Double-Entry" "reason": "Publicly reportable action lacks either the local Journal entry or the mirrored Registry entry." - "code": "ECON-03" "name": "Misapplied Royalty Rule" "reason": "Derivative income or lease reporting applied where the spec waives it (e.g., Trunks) or omitted where required." - "code": "SIG-04" "name": "Signature Policy Violation" "reason": "Declared policy not satisfied (e.g., dual but one signature missing)." "RootZero023005_Notes": "runtime_vs_training": "The items listed in RootZero023005_ErrorCodesExamples (ADES-01, LEDGER-02, ECON-03, SIG-04) are TRAINING DOMAINS, not runtime reject codes. When writing validator logic or canonical YAML, cite the true runtime reject codes from RootZero0200_ValidationPolicy and RootZero0210_ValidationChecklist. Domain labels may appear for explainability only." "RootZero023006_Metadata": "last_updated": "2025-10-06" "note": "Questions refined to align with canonical runtime reject codes and AI validation domains per RootZero0211_AIValidationDomains." "source_spec_version": "version_21.txt" "RootZero023007_Phase1_FoundationAndCovenant": "stages": - "q": "How is the Deed's foundational identity (its Deed CID) cryptographically tied to its lineage, and which VaultLogic predicates and reject codes (E-AUTH) prevent claims from a falsified origin?" "stage": "1.11" "title": "Foundational Source of Identity" - "q": "Where are the immutable, non-negotiable thin law principles (e.g., hash chaining) declared in the Deed's genesis record, and how are violations rejected with an E-CANON code?" "stage": "1.12" "title": "Immutable Core Guidance" - "q": "How does the Deed's Genesis Proof and Key State cryptographically bind its identity to a verified origin, and which reject code (E-AUTH) applies if that proof is absent or invalid?" "stage": "1.13" "title": "Verified Origin Authority" - "q": "Which canonicalization checks (NFC, LF, sorted keys) are enforced to ensure foundational data is uniform across all nodes, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a violation?" "stage": "1.14" "title": "Complete Foundational Delivery" - "q": "Where are a Deed's specific jurisdiction and authority limits declared in its VaultLogic, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) fires on an attempted action outside those bounds?" "stage": "1.15" "title": "Clear Scope Boundaries" - "q": "Which Journal fields (delegation_cid, delegator_sig, parent_hash) are mandatory for a delegation event, and how do validators deterministically reject (E-CHAIN) a delegation with a broken or unverifiable proof chain?" "stage": "1.16" "title": "Delegated Authority with Proof" - "q": "How does the thin law grammar and Journal hash chaining enforce universal, recomputable recognition of the system's state, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires if a client cannot verify the chain?" "stage": "1.17" "title": "System-Wide Recognition of Source Truth" - "q": "Which Journal and Registry fields preserve the entire history of a Deed as a recomputable record, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires if the lineage recomputation fails or any parent_hash is missing?" "stage": "1.18" "title": "End-to-End Auditability" - "q": "Which Journal fields (creator_sigs, signer, parent_hash) are mandatory to embed verifiable authority proof, and what reject code (E-AUTH) fires if those fields are incomplete or invalid?" "stage": "1.21" "title": "Verified Proof of Authority" - "q": "What specific ADES fields (settlement_cid, ledger_ref, witness_sigs) are required to provide publicly verifiable, court-grade legitimacy for a Registry event, and what reject code (E-AUTH) fires on omission?" "stage": "1.22" "title": "Public Proof of Legitimacy" - "q": "Which specific Journal event types are mandatory for all governance actions, and how does the immutable hash chain guarantee a complete, chronological audit trail without gaps?" "stage": "1.23" "title": "Audit Trails for Governance Actions" - "q": "Which specific Deed fields and VaultLogic predicates define the immutable leadership selection criteria, and how do validators enforce these rules with an E-AUTH reject code?" "stage": "1.24" "title": "Immutable Leadership Selection Criteria" - "q": "Which Journal and Registry artifacts combine to create a verifiable chain of proof, and how is the dispute resolved with a deterministic finality rule and a first-valid-wins check?" "stage": "1.25" "title": "Dispute Resolution via Higher Proof" - "q": "How do the CVID parent_hash and Journal ancestor_ref fields create a deterministic chain of command, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) applies if any link is broken?" "stage": "1.26" "title": "Clear Authority Chains" - "q": "Which Deed canonicalization fields and VaultLogic predicates ensure a command is byte-perfect and unaltered, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a discrepancy?" "stage": "1.27" "title": "Authentic Transmission of Commands" - "q": "How does the cryptographic binding of Deeds, Journal entries, and Registry receipts protect against forgery, and how do validators detect and reject (E-CANON) any tampered authority proofs?" "stage": "1.28" "title": "Legitimacy Guarded Against Corruption" - "q": "Which specific fields in a Deed's VaultLogic define access rights, and how do validators check for a corresponding, signed Journal event before approving access?" "stage": "1.31" "title": "Controlled Access via Verified Rights" - "q": "What Journal event types and VaultLogic predicates are used to revoke access, and how is the revocation logged immutably without breaking the continuity chain?" "stage": "1.32" "title": "Access Revocation for Breach of Trust" - "q": "Which mandatory CVID fields and Journal entries are used to authenticate a data movement, and what reject code (E-AUTH) fires if the signature policy is not met?" "stage": "1.33" "title": "Verified Data Transmission" - "q": "How are the Deed CID and a signed Journal entry embedded in every action's metadata, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires if the origin or scope proof is missing?" "stage": "1.34" "title": "Authority Proof Embedded in Actions" - "q": "Which evidence set and witness classes must accompany a COUNTER_DEED, and how is the removal of illegitimate authority confirmed by a deterministic, non-reversible Registry entry?" "stage": "1.35" "title": "Revocation of Unauthorized Leaders" - "q": "Where are the Journal's hash-linked proofs stored for immutable offline recomputation, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on any detected tampering?" "stage": "1.36" "title": "Immutable Proof Records" - "q": "How do ValidationPolicy predicates ensure that a Deed's VaultLogic aligns with the immutable thin law, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if a misalignment is detected?" "stage": "1.37" "title": "Control Alignment with Core Principles" - "q": "Which specific structural rules (first-valid-wins, non-backdating, hash chaining) are enforced by validators, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if a structural drift is attempted?" "stage": "1.38" "title": "Secured Structural Integrity" - "q": "Which Journal fields (deed_cid, journal_ref) are mandatory to bind every claim of right or fact to a verifiable origin, and what reject code (E-AUTH) fires if the binding is missing?" "stage": "1.41" "title": "Verified Origin of Claims" - "q": "How do the immutable thin law principles declared in the Deed's genesis record constrain local policy evolution, and how is an attempt to override these bounds rejected (E-SCOPE)?" "stage": "1.42" "title": "Integrity via Core Boundaries" - "q": "How do the hash-linked Journal entries create a non-rewriteable, immutable historical record, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires on any attempt at a silent rewrite?" "stage": "1.43" "title": "Immutable Historical Records" - "q": "How are rights assigned via a signed Journal event (assignment_cid), and how does the Registry ADES record the rights transfer with a final, non-disputable receipt (ADES-R)?" "stage": "1.44" "title": "Secure Assignment of Rights" - "q": "Which specific VaultLogic predicates and cryptographic checks are used to reject unauthorized structural changes, and what reject code (E-CANON) fires when such a change is attempted?" "stage": "1.45" "title": "Resistance to Unauthorized Modifications" - "q": "How is ownership proven via a signed Journal event (ownership_transfer) linked to a Registry receipt (ADES-R), and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires if the chain of custody is broken?" "stage": "1.46" "title": "Ownership via Chain of Custody" - "q": "What specific Journal events (revocation_cid) and VaultLogic predicates allow for the revocation of authority due to a breach of declared policy, and which reject code (E-REV) is used?" "stage": "1.47" "title": "Revocable Authority Against Injustice" - "q": "Which specific fields (witness_cids, attest_sigs) are required in a Journal event to record witness testimony, and which reject code (E-WIT) fires if the testimony is insufficient?" "stage": "1.48" "title": "Authenticity via Verified Testimony" - "q": "Where are the VaultLogic predicates that encode specific delegation thresholds and qualifications for a Deed, and which reject code (E-DEL) fires if a delegation violates these rules?" "stage": "1.51" "title": "Careful Delegation of Authority" - "q": "How is the M-of-N quorum for a Deed defined to ensure validator diversity, and how does the deterministic thin law prevent a loss of consensus due to decentralization?" "stage": "1.52" "title": "Balanced Decentralization" - "q": "Which code (E-CANON) fires if a byte-for-byte canonical recomposition of any record fails?" "stage": "1.53" "title": "Tamper-Proof Records" - "q": "How does a ContinuityBundle (cb_cid) provide all necessary Journal and Registry data to resolve a dispute with recomputable, verifiable evidence, eliminating the need for trust-based testimony?" "stage": "1.54" "title": "Evidence-Based Dispute Resolution" - "q": "How is a Deed's succession plan encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which Journal event types are mandatory to enact a succession, with verification from a diverse validator set?" "stage": "1.55" "title": "Planned Succession for Stability" - "q": "How do the floor and royalty fields in a Deed's VaultLogic and the Registry ADES entries (payment_cid) encode fair resource distribution, and how are violations rejected?" "stage": "1.56" "title": "Fair Resource Distribution" - "q": "Which specific Journal artifacts (signed proposal_cid, vote_cids, outcome_cid) make all governance decisions auditable and public, and how does the Registry provide a final, verifiable receipt of the decision?" "stage": "1.57" "title": "Transparent Governance Processes" - "q": "How does the first-valid-wins rule, combined with the non-rewriteable Journal, guarantee consistent and predictable justice, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if a re-attempted action is invalid?" "stage": "1.58" "title": "Trust via Consistent Justice" "RootZero023008_Phase2_StabilityAndResilience": "stages": - "q": "How does a Deed’s Constitution and thin law lock its core principles after genesis, and which VaultLogic predicates and reject codes (E-CANON) prevent and signal an attempted alteration?" "stage": "2.11" "title": "Preserved Core Principles" - "q": "How does the ValidationChecklist (§0210_ValidationChecklist) define deterministic rules that all validators must follow, and how is consensus achieved without runtime negotiation?" "stage": "2.12" "title": "Unified Consensus Mechanism" - "q": "Which ConversionRules (§0220_ConversionRules) are mandatory for system upgrades, and how do they ensure new protocols remain verifiable against a Deed’s original thin law declarations?" "stage": "2.13" "title": "Principled Adaptability" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) and Journal event types (§02_Journal) guarantee fairness across tenants, and how are violations rejected with an E-SCOPE code?" "stage": "2.14" "title": "Trust Through Fair Governance" - "q": "Which Journal and Registry fields (§02_Journal, §03_PublicAccountingRegistry) preserve governance processes as immutable records, and how are proposals and votes linked to ensure full knowledge continuity?" "stage": "2.15" "title": "Immutable Knowledge Transfer" - "q": "Which Journal event types (expert_cert, policy_ref) bind expert interpretations as enforceable predicates, and what reject code (E-AUTH) fires if attestations are missing?" "stage": "2.16" "title": "Verified Scholarly Interpretation" - "q": "How are M-of-N quorum and diversity thresholds (geo/org/tier) encoded in VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) and enforced at accept time, with E-WIT-DIV on diversity violation?" "stage": "2.17" "title": "Distributed Oversight Structures" - "q": "How does thin law unify heterogeneous VaultLogic policies by enforcing one deterministic set of validation rules, and which reject code (E-CANON) applies if violated?" "stage": "2.18" "title": "Stability via Shared Law" - "q": "Which specific ValidationPolicy checks (§02_ValidationPolicy) — e.g., canonicalization, hash chain, ancestry — are mandatory to detect deviations, and how are violations rejected?" "stage": "2.21" "title": "Clear Standard for Identifying Deviations" - "q": "How do Deed signatures, Journal ancestry checks, and ValidationPolicy rules ensure all events are authenticated, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires on malicious events?" "stage": "2.22" "title": "Awareness of Deceptive Entry Points" - "q": "Which Journal event types (COUNTER_DEED, EQUIV_LINK) and VaultLogic predicates formalize repentance and rectification without altering original immutable records?" "stage": "2.23" "title": "Structured Repentance and Rectification" - "q": "How do Journal parent_hash and continuity fields (§02_Journal) create a verifiable, non-rewriteable update history, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires on violation?" "stage": "2.24" "title": "Version-Controlled Updates" - "q": "Which Journal event types (correction, rectification) preserve a correction as a new immutable record while leaving the original unaltered?" "stage": "2.25" "title": "Immutable Historical Record in Corrections" - "q": "Which signatures and attestations (correction_sigs) from a Deed’s oversight group are mandatory to legitimize a correction, and which reject code (E-AUTH) applies if missing?" "stage": "2.26" "title": "Verified Correction Approval" - "q": "Which ValidationPolicy predicates (§02_ValidationPolicy) and specimens (§0240_Specimens) are used for early detection of structural risk, and which reject code (E-RISK) is triggered?" "stage": "2.27" "title": "Prevention via Early Warning Systems" - "q": "How do validators confirm a Deed’s alignment to its core principles at each accept event, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if deviation occurs?" "stage": "2.28" "title": "Continual Alignment Monitoring" - "q": "How are multi-tier witness classes (tier_1_witness, geo_witness) encoded in VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-WIT) fires if invalid?" "stage": "2.31" "title": "Layered Witness Testimony" - "q": "How are M-of-N quorum rules for each Deed enforced, and how do validators reject (E-WIT) if quorum signatures are insufficient?" "stage": "2.32" "title": "Majority Verification Rules" - "q": "How are parent_cid and jurisdiction_ref fields (§02_Journal, §03_PublicAccountingRegistry) used to create escalation paths to higher proofs, and how are they enforced?" "stage": "2.33" "title": "Hierarchical Escalation Paths" - "q": "How are neutral validators declared in VaultLogic, and which reject code (E-FINAL) fires if finality is violated or conflicts of interest arise?" "stage": "2.34" "title": "Neutral Arbitration Panels" - "q": "Which Journal events (dispute, ruling, settlement) are mandatory to record disputes, and how does the immutable hash chain guarantee permanent auditability?" "stage": "2.35" "title": "Immutable Dispute Records" - "q": "Which Journal and Registry fields (treaty_cid, agreement_proof) anchor multi-sovereign agreements, ensuring universal verification by all Deeds?" "stage": "2.36" "title": "Cross-Jurisdiction Agreement Protocols" - "q": "Which ADES fields (settlement_cid, finality_proof) enforce settlements, and how does the Registry provide a final, non-disputable receipt (ADES-R)?" "stage": "2.37" "title": "Verified Settlement Enforcement" - "q": "How does first-valid-wins combined with immutable Journal entries prevent reopening finalized disputes, and which reject code (E-FINAL) fires on re-attempt?" "stage": "2.38" "title": "Consensus Lock After Resolution" - "q": "Which Journal events (anomaly, warning) and attestations detect abnormal behavior, and which reject code (E-RISK) fires if threats are surfaced?" "stage": "2.41" "title": "Early Threat Detection" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates define allowable state changes during containment, and which reject code (E-RISK) applies on violation?" "stage": "2.42" "title": "Immediate Containment Procedures" - "q": "How do CVIDs, signatures, and Journal urgent_signal events secure urgent communications, and which reject code (E-SIG) fires on mismatch?" "stage": "2.43" "title": "Secure Communication Channels" - "q": "Which ContinuityBundles (see §0210_ValidationChecklist, Offline Recomputation) and proofs are mandatory for cold-start verification, and how do validators recompute state without central authority?" "stage": "2.44" "title": "Resilience Through Redundancy" - "q": "Which Journal and Registry fields (§02_Journal, §03_PublicAccountingRegistry) are required for full offline recomputation, and how is integrity confirmed by a deterministic bit-for-bit match?" "stage": "2.45" "title": "Integrity Checks After Attack" - "q": "Where is emergency authority pre-declared in VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires if an unauthorized key is used?" "stage": "2.46" "title": "Trusted Recovery Leadership" - "q": "Which Journal events (status_report, recovery_step) are mandatory to make recovery steps auditable, and how does the immutable record ensure transparency?" "stage": "2.47" "title": "Public Status Transparency" - "q": "How are new mitigation rules encoded in VaultLogic predicates after a threat, and which reject code (E-RISK) applies if ignored?" "stage": "2.48" "title": "Reinforcement of Protocol After Threat" - "q": "Which Deed fields and VaultLogic predicates declare expansion rules, and how are new issuances verified in Registry (§03_PublicAccountingRegistry) to preserve scarcity?" "stage": "2.51" "title": "Strategic Territory Expansion Rules" - "q": "Which Journal events (allegiance_claim, attestation) and witness signatures are required to prove allegiance, and how are they validated?" "stage": "2.52" "title": "Inclusion via Verified Allegiance" - "q": "How are inter-tenant treaties recorded as signed Journal events (treaty_cid), and how does the Registry enforce them with ADES receipts?" "stage": "2.53" "title": "Diplomatic Treaty Verification" - "q": "How do canonical grammar rules (§01000401_CanonicalSortSpec, NFC, sorted keys) enable interoperability, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on violations?" "stage": "2.54" "title": "Cross-Network Compatibility Standards" - "q": "Which ADES fields (resource_cid, share_ratio, timestamp) are mandatory to account for resource-sharing commitments, and how do validators verify them with Registry entries?" "stage": "2.55" "title": "Resource-Sharing Agreements" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates and Journal events safeguard integrated communities, and how are violations enforced with E-SCOPE or E-JST?" "stage": "2.56" "title": "Protection of Integrated Communities" - "q": "How can cultural constraints be encoded in VaultLogic predicates without violating thin law, and which reject code (E-SOC) fires on violation?" "stage": "2.57" "title": "Cultural Respect Protocols" - "q": "How are reciprocal security assurances recorded as signed Journal events (security_assurance) and verified in Registry, and which reject code (E-SEC) applies if breached?" "stage": "2.58" "title": "Mutually Enforced Security Commitments" "RootZero023009_Phase3_SovereigntyAndDecentralization": "stages": - "q": "How does a Deed’s Genesis Proof and master_pubkey bind its sovereignty to a single cryptographic root, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires if this proof is invalid?" "stage": "3.11" "title": "Irrevocable Sovereignty" - "q": "Where are immutable validator membership rules (M-of-N, geo_limits) encoded in VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-WIT) fires if violated?" "stage": "3.12" "title": "Validator Membership Criteria" - "q": "How are governance decisions recorded as immutable Journal entries (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if artifacts are missing?" "stage": "3.13" "title": "On-Chain Governance Records" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates and Registry fields (§03_PublicAccountingRegistry) ensure validator independence, and which reject code (E-WIT) fires on collusion?" "stage": "3.14" "title": "Independent Validator Operations" - "q": "How do public state_hash and Journal entries provide recomputable proof of current state, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires if state cannot be verified?" "stage": "3.15" "title": "Public Audit of State" - "q": "How is sovereign-to-representative delegation recorded in Journal (delegation_cid), and which reject code (E-DEL) applies if consent is missing?" "stage": "3.16" "title": "Delegation with Consent" - "q": "How are bylaws locked at Genesis, and which VaultLogic predicates and reject codes (E-CANON) prevent alteration?" "stage": "3.17" "title": "Immutable Bylaws" - "q": "Which Journal event types (dispute_cid, resolution_cid) record dispute outcomes, and how does the immutable record ensure auditability?" "stage": "3.18" "title": "Decentralized Dispute Resolution" - "q": "Which Journal fields (proposal_cid, legislative_sigs) are required to legislate updates, and how is new VaultLogic enforced with Registry finality proofs (§03_PublicAccountingRegistry)?" "stage": "3.21" "title": "On-Chain Legislative Process" - "q": "Which Journal events (revocation, expulsion_cid) revoke validator membership, and what reject code (E-REV) applies if unauthorized?" "stage": "3.22" "title": "Membership Revocation" - "q": "How are votes recorded as signed Journal events (vote_cid, voter_sig), and which reject code (E-AUTH) applies if signatures are invalid?" "stage": "3.23" "title": "Secure Voting Protocols" - "q": "How do CVIDs and signed message_digests authenticate validator communication, and which reject code (E-SIG) fires on mismatch?" "stage": "3.24" "title": "Decentralized Communication" - "q": "How does currency_anchor in VaultLogic guarantee financial autonomy, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) applies if rules are violated?" "stage": "3.25" "title": "Financial Autonomy" - "q": "Which Journal events (replacement_cid, new_validator_sig) record replacement of a validator, and how is compliance verified via the ValidationChecklist (§0210_ValidationChecklist)?" "stage": "3.26" "title": "Validator Replacement" - "q": "How do Journal rulings and Registry ADES receipts enforce justice, and which reject code (E-FINAL) fires on re-attempted disputes?" "stage": "3.27" "title": "Publicly Enforceable Justice" - "q": "How is protocol update consensus recorded in Journal (update_cid), and which reject code (E-CANON) applies if thin law is violated?" "stage": "3.28" "title": "Consensus on Protocol Updates" - "q": "How are allocation rules encoded in VaultLogic, and which Registry fields (resource_cid, allocation_proof) prove compliance?" "stage": "3.31" "title": "Resource Allocation via Predicates" - "q": "Which Journal events (budget_cid, spend_cid) are mandatory for budgeting, and how does immutability prevent hidden spending?" "stage": "3.32" "title": "On-Chain Budgeting" - "q": "How does the hash-linked Journal (§02_Journal) support fiscal audits, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires on recomputation failure?" "stage": "3.33" "title": "Fiscal Audits" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates (anti_hoard, liquidity_check) prevent hoarding, and which reject code (E-SOC) applies on violation?" "stage": "3.34" "title": "Protection Against Hoarding" - "q": "How are tax and revenue rules encoded in VaultLogic, and which Registry fields (tax_remit_cid) prove compliance?" "stage": "3.35" "title": "Tax and Revenue Protocols" - "q": "How are private vs. public resources distinguished in VaultLogic, and which Journal event types govern commons?" "stage": "3.36" "title": "Public Commons Governance" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates and ADES fields (distribution_cid, share_proof) enforce revenue distribution, and which reject code (E-ROYALTY) fires on violation?" "stage": "3.37" "title": "Revenue Distribution" - "q": "How do first-valid-wins and Registry receipts ensure financial finality, and which reject code (E-FINAL) applies on re-attempt?" "stage": "3.38" "title": "Economic Finality" - "q": "Which Journal events (identity_attestation, cid_bind) manage identity, and what reject code (E-AUTH) applies on invalid attestations?" "stage": "3.41" "title": "Identity Management" - "q": "How are keys managed non-custodially, and which reject code (E-AUTH) applies if seizure is attempted?" "stage": "3.42" "title": "Non-Custodial Security" - "q": "How does cryptographic binding of CVIDs prevent forgery, and which reject code (E-FORGE) fires on forgery attempts?" "stage": "3.43" "title": "CVID Forgery Prevention" - "q": "Which Journal events (interop_cid, agreement_proof) enable cross-Deed interoperability, and how are violations rejected (E-SCOPE)?" "stage": "3.44" "title": "Cross-Deed Interoperability" - "q": "How is participant onboarding encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-AUTH) applies on violation?" "stage": "3.45" "title": "Protocol for New Participants" - "q": "How are privacy rules encoded in VaultLogic, and what reject code (E-PRIV) applies if violated during audits?" "stage": "3.46" "title": "Privacy Preserving Audits" - "q": "How can privacy rights be delegated via Journal (privacy_delegate), and what reject code (E-DEL) applies if rules are violated?" "stage": "3.47" "title": "Delegated Privacy Rights" - "q": "How does the hash-linked Registry (§03_PublicAccountingRegistry) guarantee public ledger integrity, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) applies if tampered?" "stage": "3.48" "title": "Public Ledger Integrity" - "q": "How are legal predicates encoded in VaultLogic, and which reject code (E-JST) applies on violations?" "stage": "3.51" "title": "Transparent Legal Framework" - "q": "Which Journal events (legal_ruling, enforcement_order) enforce legal rulings, and how does Registry provide final receipts (ADES)?" "stage": "3.52" "title": "Enforcement of Legal Consensus" - "q": "How are treaties (treaty_cid) recorded as immutable Journal entries, and how does Registry enforce them with ADES receipts?" "stage": "3.53" "title": "On-Chain Treaty Verification" - "q": "How do jurisdiction_ref fields resolve law conflicts, and which reject code (E-JST) applies if thin law is violated?" "stage": "3.54" "title": "Conflict of Laws" - "q": "Which Journal events (legal_attestation, compliance_proof) prove accountability, and which reject code (E-JST) fires if absent?" "stage": "3.55" "title": "Accountability to Law" - "q": "How are sanctions encoded in VaultLogic and enforced with Journal + Registry receipts, and which reject codes apply (E-JST, E-FINAL)?" "stage": "3.56" "title": "Sanctions & Punishment" - "q": "How are judge, jury, and attorney roles encoded in VaultLogic, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) applies if roles are exceeded?" "stage": "3.57" "title": "Self-Governing Judicial System" - "q": "How is legislative intent bound to thin law, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if new laws introduce contradictions?" "stage": "3.58" "title": "Unambiguous Legislative Intent" "RootZero023010_Phase4_NetworkAndDataIntegrity": "stages": - "q": "How are peer_address and pubkey encoded to enable deterministic peer discovery without a central authority, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires if a peer’s pubkey cannot be verified?" "stage": "4.11" "title": "Peer-to-Peer Discovery" - "q": "How are network topology rules (quorum_cids, peer_limits) encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) fires on an attempt to join a network outside its declared topology?" "stage": "4.12" "title": "Network Topology Rules" - "q": "How is data integrity guaranteed by hash-linked Journal entries and a mandatory integrity_proof in the Registry, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a data corruption event?" "stage": "4.13" "title": "Data Integrity Checks" - "q": "How do validators ensure a synchronized state by verifying a shared state_hash at every accept event, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires if a validator’s state is out of sync?" "stage": "4.14" "title": "Synchronized State" - "q": "How are all inter-validator messages (message_digest, message_sigs) cryptographically signed, and which reject code (E-SIG) fires on a signature mismatch?" "stage": "4.15" "title": "Tamper-Proof Communication" - "q": "Which Journal and Registry fields (data_cid, timestamp) are mandatory to ensure all data is immutable and non-backdated, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a backdating attempt?" "stage": "4.16" "title": "Data Immutability" - "q": "How do M-of-N quorum rules and a decentralized validator_set ensure fault tolerance, and which reject code (E-WIT) fires if a network partition is detected?" "stage": "4.17" "title": "Fault Tolerance" - "q": "How does a mandatory nonce and timestamp field in a signed Journal event prevent a replay attack, and which reject code (E-RISK) fires if a replayed event is detected?" "stage": "4.18" "title": "Replay Attack Prevention" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates and peer_reputation scores are used to manage a peer’s reputation, and which reject code (E-WIT) fires on an action from a peer with insufficient reputation?" "stage": "4.21" "title": "Peer Reputation System" - "q": "How is a bad_actor (CID, revocation_proof) formally identified and removed from the network via a signed Journal event, and which reject code (E-REV) fires if the expulsion is unauthorized?" "stage": "4.22" "title": "Consensus on Bad Actors" - "q": "How are rate_limit rules encoded in VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) fires if a peer exceeds its allowed action rate?" "stage": "4.23" "title": "Rate Limiting" - "q": "Which cryptographic proofs (encrypted_cid, symmetric_key_ref) are mandatory to ensure data is transmitted securely, and which reject code (E-PRIV) fires on an attempt to access restricted data?" "stage": "4.24" "title": "Secure Data Transmission" - "q": "How is data fragmentation (shard_cid, part_hash) encoded in VaultLogic predicates, and how do validators ensure a recomputable and complete record with an E-CHAIN reject code on failure?" "stage": "4.25" "title": "Data Fragmentation" - "q": "Which Journal events (migration_cid, migration_sigs) and VaultLogic predicates are mandatory for data migration, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a violation?" "stage": "4.26" "title": "Protocol for Data Migration" - "q": "How does the Registry provide verifiable metadata (asset_cid, creator_sig) for all on-chain assets, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires if the metadata is invalid or missing?" "stage": "4.27" "title": "Verifiable Metadata" - "q": "How is a Deed’s domain name (dns_ref) and its corresponding CID recorded in the Registry, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a violation of the canonical DNS aliasing rules?" "stage": "4.28" "title": "Decentralized DNS" - "q": "How are sharding rules and shard_keys encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) fires if an event is committed to the wrong shard?" "stage": "4.31" "title": "Data Sharding" - "q": "How are cross-shard events (inter-shard_cid, proof_of_inclusion) verified to ensure global consistency, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires on a consistency violation?" "stage": "4.32" "title": "Cross-Shard Consistency" - "q": "How does the Merkle tree structure of the Journal enable a scalable audit of any state, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires if an audit fails?" "stage": "4.33" "title": "Scalable Audits" - "q": "How are validator_load rules encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-WIT) fires if a validator is over its allocated load?" "stage": "4.34" "title": "Validator Load Balancing" - "q": "Which Journal events (health_cid, status_proof) are mandatory to monitor network health, and what reject code (E-RISK) fires on a detected anomaly?" "stage": "4.35" "title": "Network Health Monitoring" - "q": "How are compression_rules encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if data is not compressed according to the rules?" "stage": "4.36" "title": "Data Compression" - "q": "How is every on-chain artifact stored using a CID, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires if canonical recomposition of the content fails?" "stage": "4.37" "title": "Content-Addressed Storage" - "q": "Which Journal events (proof_cid, verifier_sigs) and VaultLogic predicates are mandatory to anchor an off-chain proof, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires on an invalid proof?" "stage": "4.38" "title": "Off-Chain Proofs" - "q": "How is the protocol version (version_ref, version_sigs) encoded in a Deed’s genesis record, and how is consensus on a new version enforced with a signed Journal event?" "stage": "4.41" "title": "Protocol Versioning" - "q": "Which Journal event types (changelog, change_proof) are mandatory to record all protocol changes, and how does the immutable record ensure an auditable history?" "stage": "4.42" "title": "Immutable Changelog" - "q": "Which ConversionRules (§0220_ConversionRules) are mandatory to ensure backward compatibility for all protocol updates, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a violation?" "stage": "4.43" "title": "Backward Compatibility" - "q": "How are a Deed’s upgrade paths defined in VaultLogic, and how do validators enforce a deterministic, non-disruptive upgrade?" "stage": "4.44" "title": "Upgrade Path" - "q": "How are legacy systems integrated via a signed Journal event (legacy_bridge, attest_sigs), and which reject code (E-SCOPE) fires on an unauthorized integration?" "stage": "4.45" "title": "Legacy System Integration" - "q": "How are deprecated protocols (deprecate_cid, deprecate_proof) formally retired via a signed Journal event, and which reject code (E-FINAL) fires if a deprecated protocol is re-attempted?" "stage": "4.46" "title": "Protocol Deprecation" - "q": "How is the forking policy (fork_cid, fork_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a violation of the policy?" "stage": "4.47" "title": "Forking Policy" - "q": "How is consensus on a fork (fork_cid, quorum_sigs) recorded as a signed Journal event, and how is the new fork made canonical?" "stage": "4.48" "title": "Consensus on Forks" - "q": "How are archiving rules encoded as VaultLogic predicates, and which Registry fields (archive_cid, archive_proof) are mandatory to prove compliance?" "stage": "4.51" "title": "Data Archiving" - "q": "Which Journal event types (restore_cid, restore_proof) and VaultLogic predicates are mandatory to restore data, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires on an invalid restoration attempt?" "stage": "4.52" "title": "Data Restoration" - "q": "How do the hash-linked Journal entries create a non-rewriteable audit log for all actions, and which reject code (E-CHAIN) fires on an attempt to tamper with the log?" "stage": "4.53" "title": "Immutable Audit Logs" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates encode the data retention policy, and which reject code (E-SCOPE) fires on an attempt to store data beyond its allowed retention period?" "stage": "4.54" "title": "Data Retention Policy" - "q": "How are privacy_controls and access_cids encoded in VaultLogic, and which reject code (E-PRIV) fires on an unauthorized data access attempt?" "stage": "4.55" "title": "Data Privacy Controls" - "q": "How is a secure data deletion (delete_cid, deletion_proof) recorded as a signed Journal event, ensuring irrecoverability while preserving the hash chain?" "stage": "4.56" "title": "Secure Deletion" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates and content_hashes are mandatory to verify the integrity of on-chain content, and which reject code (E-CANON) fires on a verification failure?" "stage": "4.57" "title": "Content Verification" - "q": "How is the provenance (origin_cid, parent_sigs) of all on-chain data recorded in the Journal, and which reject code (E-AUTH) fires on a missing or invalid provenance record?" "stage": "4.58" "title": "Data Provenance" "RootZero023011_Phase5_EconomicsAndAdoption": "stages": - "q": "How is a Deed's financial model (revenue_share, royalty_rates) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-ROYALTY, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these declarations?" "stage": "5.11" "title": "Financial Declaration" - "q": "How are all financial transactions (tx_cid, ledger_proof) recorded as immutable Journal entries (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-FINAL, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to alter a finalized transaction?" "stage": "5.12" "title": "Transaction Validation" - "q": "How are escrow rules encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which Journal events (escrow_cid, release_proof, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to ensure verifiable release of funds, with E-AUTH on invalid release and E-CANON on rule violation?" "stage": "5.13" "title": "On-Chain Escrow" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) define a Deed's fee structure (gas_fee, transfer_fee), and which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if a transaction attempts to use a fee structure outside declared limits?" "stage": "5.14" "title": "Fee Structures" - "q": "How is the full provenance of a digital asset (origin_cid, creator_sig) recorded in the Journal (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if the provenance record is invalid or missing?" "stage": "5.15" "title": "Asset Provenance" - "q": "How does a Deed's VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) distinguish between public and private assets, and which reject code (E-PRIV, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized attempt to access a private asset?" "stage": "5.16" "title": "Public-Private Asset Declaration" - "q": "How are token_issuance and supply_limits encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-CANON, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these immutable rules?" "stage": "5.17" "title": "Token Economics" - "q": "Which Journal events (reward_cid, distribution_proof, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record reward distributions, and how are violations of the reward_policy rejected (E-ROYALTY, see §0200_ValidationPolicy)?" "stage": "5.18" "title": "Reward Distribution" - "q": "How are cross-Deed exchanges (exchange_cid, exchange_sigs) recorded as immutable Journal entries (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on an exchange with an unapproved counterparty?" "stage": "5.21" "title": "Inter-Deed Exchange" - "q": "How are lending rules (loan_cid, loan_terms) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-JST, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these legal agreements?" "stage": "5.22" "title": "On-Chain Lending" - "q": "Which Journal events (stake_cid, unstake_proof, see §0200_Journal) and VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) are mandatory to record staking, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized staking attempt?" "stage": "5.23" "title": "Staking Protocols" - "q": "How are market_maker rules (liquidity_provider_cid) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-TRADE, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of trading rules?" "stage": "5.24" "title": "Market Maker Rules" - "q": "Which Journal events (supply_cid, demand_proof, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record on-chain supply and demand, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if recomputation of the proof fails?" "stage": "5.25" "title": "Supply and Demand" - "q": "How are asset valuation rules (valuation_cid, audit_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-CANON, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on violations of these deterministic rules?" "stage": "5.26" "title": "Asset Valuation" - "q": "Which Journal events (credit_cid, credit_proof, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record on-chain credit, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if credit is granted without proper authority?" "stage": "5.27" "title": "On-Chain Credit" - "q": "How does the hash-linked Journal (§0200_Journal) provide a recomputable record for all economic activity, and which reject code (E-CHAIN, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if a financial sequence fails to recompute?" "stage": "5.28" "title": "Economic Transparency" - "q": "How are customer verification rules (KYC_ref, ID_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a missing or invalid proof?" "stage": "5.31" "title": "Customer Identity Verification" - "q": "Which Journal events (onboard_cid, onboard_sigs, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record user onboarding, and which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if a user attempts to join outside the declared protocol?" "stage": "5.32" "title": "User Onboarding" - "q": "How is a user’s on-chain reputation (reputation_cid, attest_sigs) recorded in the Journal (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-WIT, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if a user attempts an action with insufficient reputation?" "stage": "5.33" "title": "User Reputation" - "q": "Which VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) and encryption_keys are mandatory to ensure secure user data, and which reject code (E-PRIV, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a data leak?" "stage": "5.34" "title": "Secure User Data" - "q": "How is a user’s offboarding (offboard_cid, offboard_proof) recorded as an immutable Journal entry (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-REV, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if the offboarding is unauthorized?" "stage": "5.35" "title": "User Offboarding" - "q": "Which Journal events (license_cid, license_sigs, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record content licensing, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a missing or invalid license?" "stage": "5.36" "title": "Content Licensing" - "q": "How is ownership of a digital asset transferred via a signed Journal event (transfer_cid, see §0200_Journal), and how does a Registry receipt (§0300_PublicAccountingRegistry) provide finality, with E-AUTH on invalid transfer or E-FINAL on a re-attempt?" "stage": "5.37" "title": "Ownership Transfer" - "q": "How are governance rights (vote_power, proposal_sigs) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-WIT, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if a user attempts an action without required rights?" "stage": "5.38" "title": "Governance Rights" - "q": "How can a user's user_policy be encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-CANON, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if a user-defined policy violates thin law?" "stage": "5.41" "title": "User-Defined Policies" - "q": "How are reciprocal agreements (reciprocal_cid, agreement_sigs) recorded as signed Journal events (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of the agreement?" "stage": "5.42" "title": "Reciprocal Agreements" - "q": "Which Journal events (integration_cid, attest_sigs, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record third-party integration, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized integration?" "stage": "5.43" "title": "Third-Party Integration" - "q": "How is data interoperability (interop_cid, interop_proof) ensured via VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-CANON, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a data format violation?" "stage": "5.44" "title": "Data Interoperability" - "q": "How are ecosystem incentives (incentive_cid, award_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-ROYALTY, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of incentive policy?" "stage": "5.45" "title": "Ecosystem Incentives" - "q": "Which Journal events (arbitration_cid, arbitration_proof, see §0200_Journal) are mandatory to record dispute arbitration, and how is a ruling made final with an ADES receipt (§0300_PublicAccountingRegistry), with E-FINAL on a re-attempt and runtime → E-ANCHOR / E-CHAIN for anchoring or hash mismatch (see §0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping)." "stage": "5.46" "title": "Dispute Arbitration" - "q": "How is a user's reputation history (reputation_history_cid) recorded as a hash-linked Journal entry (§0200_Journal), and which reject code (E-CHAIN, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to tamper with the history? Include runtime → E-ANCHOR for any priced or anchored reputation token (§0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping)." "stage": "5.47" "title": "Immutable Reputation" - "q": "How does the Registry (§0300_PublicAccountingRegistry) provide a canonical, immutable record of all on-chain assets, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if Registry integrity is compromised or (E-AUTH) if an asset's provenance is invalid? Add runtime → E-ANCHOR for priced assets or valuation anchors (§0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping)." "stage": "5.48" "title": "Asset Registry" - "q": "Evaluate whether this transaction type qualifies for public reporting under §0300_PublicAccountingRegistry. How are resource licenses and carbon credits recorded as cross-ledger double-entry events — with a local Journal entry (§0200_Journal) and a public Registry entry via ADES? If either entry is missing, raise LEDGER-02 (runtime → E-CHAIN / E-FINAL / E-TURN / E-CANON) as defined in §0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping and §023005_ErrorCodesExamples." "stage": "5.51" "title": "Conservation of Natural Resources" - "q": "How are land use agreements and geospatial attestations encoded in VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), with conditions that require a witness quorum for any changes, and which reject code (E-WIT-DIV, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires if the witness diversity policy is violated?" "stage": "5.52" "title": "Responsible Land Use" - "q": "How do immutable meter readings become CVID-bound Journal entries (§0200_Journal), and how does the system ensure PQC-only or dual-signature policy enforcement as a security primitive? Which reject code (E-SIG, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a policy violation?" "stage": "5.53" "title": "Water Preservation Systems" - "q": "How are renewable energy generation certificates recorded in the Journal (§0200_Journal) to prevent double counting, and what VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure) prevent a user from claiming duplicate credits from the same certificate over time? Include runtime → E-ANCHOR for daily energy credit price fixing (§0230051_DomainToRuntimeMapping)." "stage": "5.54" "title": "Renewable Energy Promotion" - "q": "How is a chain of custody for waste manifests created using hash-linked CVIDs (§0220_ConversionRules)? Which reject code (E-CHAIN, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a broken chain, and what is the validator's specific logic for recomputing the hash lineage to prove continuity?" "stage": "5.55" "title": "Waste Management Protocols" - "q": "How are geofenced permits and ecological surveys encoded as CVID-bound Journal entries (§0200_Journal) that tie to VaultLogic (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure)? Which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation, and which (E-JST) fires if a required cross-jurisdictional agreement is missing?" "stage": "5.56" "title": "Wildlife and Habitat Protection" - "q": "How are climate risk policies and triggers encoded as immutable VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-SEC, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on a policy that is not cryptographically sound? What are the key checks a validator performs to ensure the logic is non–Turing complete and acyclic?" "stage": "5.57" "title": "Climate Risk Preparedness" - "q": "How are attestations for educational milestones recorded as Journal events (§0200_Journal), and how does the system's design prevent a Journal entry from being rewritten or retroactively altered? Which reject code (E-FINAL, see §0200_ValidationPolicy) fires on such a violation?" "stage": "5.58" "title": "Community Education on Sustainability" "RootZero023012_Phase6_GovernanceAndLaw": "stages": - "q": "How do canonicalization and CVIDs (§0220_ConversionRules) define enforceable truth standards, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these standards?" "stage": "6.11" "title": "Truth Verification Standards" - "q": "How do immutable provenance and validator checks (§02_Journal) constrain misinformation, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an invalid provenance proof?" "stage": "6.12" "title": "Prevention of Misinformation" - "q": "How can journalism ethics (ethics_cid, ethics_proof) be enforced as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-SOC, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these social and ethical rules?" "stage": "6.13" "title": "Ethical Journalism Guidelines" - "q": "How is verified data (verified_data_cid, access_proof) made accessible without exposing secrets, and which reject code (E-PRIV, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized access attempt?" "stage": "6.14" "title": "Public Access to Verified Data" - "q": "How can platforms attest to integrity via Journal attestations (attest_cid, attest_proof, see §02_Journal) and Registry proofs (§03_PublicAccountingRegistry), and which reject code (E-JST, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a missing or invalid attestation?" "stage": "6.15" "title": "Digital Platform Accountability" - "q": "Which Journal events (transfer_cid, signature_proof, see §02_Journal) are mandatory to ensure secure data sharing with provenance, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if the signature is invalid or missing?" "stage": "6.16" "title": "Secure Data Sharing" - "q": "How is a user’s self-sovereign identity (ID_cid, attest_sigs) recorded and verified without a central authority (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an invalid identity proof?" "stage": "6.17" "title": "Self-Sovereign Identity" - "q": "Which Journal events (fraud_cid, prevention_proof, see §02_Journal) are mandatory to record a detected fraud attempt, and which reject code (E-FORGE, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a forgery or fraud attempt?" "stage": "6.18" "title": "Prevention of Digital Fraud" - "q": "How do hash-linked Journal entries (log_cid, log_proof, see §02_Journal) ensure a canonical, non-rewriteable record for all actions, and which reject code (E-CHAIN, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to tamper with the record?" "stage": "6.21" "title": "Canonical Record-Keeping" - "q": "How are decisions (decision_cid, decision_sigs, see §02_Journal) recorded to ensure transparency and auditability, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a non-canonical decision record?" "stage": "6.22" "title": "Transparent Decision-Making" - "q": "How is the full provenance of all data (data_cid, parent_hash, see §02_Journal) recorded and made auditable, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a missing or invalid provenance record?" "stage": "6.23" "title": "Verifiable Data Provenance" - "q": "Which Journal events (audit_cid, audit_proof, see §02_Journal) are mandatory to record a policy audit, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a policy that fails to be auditable?" "stage": "6.24" "title": "Auditability of Policy" - "q": "How are human-readable policies (human_law_cid, human_read) stored alongside their machine-readable counterparts (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if they fail to match?" "stage": "6.25" "title": "Human-Readable Law" - "q": "How are enforceable_laws (law_cid, enforce_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-JST, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these laws?" "stage": "6.26" "title": "Machine-Enforceable Law" - "q": "How is citizen participation (citizen_cid, vote_proof, see §02_Journal) recorded as an immutable Journal entry, and which reject code (E-WIT, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if a vote is cast without the required attestations?" "stage": "6.27" "title": "Citizen Participation in Governance" - "q": "How is a citizen’s digital sovereignty (sovereign_cid, sovereign_proof) declared and protected on the network (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized attempt to violate this sovereignty?" "stage": "6.28" "title": "Digital Sovereignty" - "q": "How is a dispute (dispute_cid, resolution_proof, see §02_Journal) recorded as a public, immutable entry, and which reject code (E-FINAL, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a re-attempted dispute after a final ruling?" "stage": "6.31" "title": "Protocol for Dispute Resolution" - "q": "How are arbitration rules (arbitration_cid, arbitration_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-JST, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these rules or on an attempt to alter a final ruling?" "stage": "6.32" "title": "On-Chain Arbitration" - "q": "Which Journal events (enforce_cid, enforce_proof, see §02_Journal) are mandatory to record the enforcement of a ruling, and which reject code (E-FINAL, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a re-attempt to open a finalized ruling?" "stage": "6.33" "title": "Enforcement of Rulings" - "q": "How are acts of repentance (repent_cid, reconcile_proof, see §02_Journal) recorded as immutable Journal entries without altering the past, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to alter the original record?" "stage": "6.34" "title": "Repentance and Reconciliation" - "q": "How are AI models (AI_model_cid, AI_auth_proof) attested and bound to a legal/ethical framework (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unverified AI model?" "stage": "6.35" "title": "Legal and Ethical AI" - "q": "How are all AI outputs (output_cid, output_proof) cryptographically linked to their originating AI model and a Journal entry (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-AI, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unverified AI output?" "stage": "6.36" "title": "Verifiable AI Outputs" - "q": "How is an AI’s accountability (AI_account_cid, audit_trail) ensured by a non-rewriteable audit log (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-AI, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to erase or alter this log?" "stage": "6.37" "title": "Accountability for AI Actions" - "q": "How are human oversight rules (human_oversight_cid, oversight_proof) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if a human attempts to act outside their oversight role?" "stage": "6.38" "title": "Human Oversight of AI" - "q": "How are the thin law’s foundational principles (principle_cid, principle_sigs) recorded at Genesis (§0130_Constitution) to ensure preservation, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to alter them?" "stage": "6.41" "title": "Long-Term Preservation of Principles" - "q": "How are protocol changes (change_cid, change_proof) recorded as immutable Journal events (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a change not made canonically?" "stage": "6.42" "title": "Canonical Protocol for Evolution" - "q": "How are cross-Deed communications (inter_deed_cid, receipt_proof, see §02_Journal) recorded as immutable entries, and which reject code (E-SCOPE, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an inter-Deed action that violates its scope?" "stage": "6.43" "title": "Inter-Deed Communication" - "q": "How are privacy controls (privacy_cid, access_sigs) encoded as VaultLogic predicates (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-PRIV, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized access attempt?" "stage": "6.44" "title": "On-Chain Privacy Controls" - "q": "How do Registry receipts (evaluation_cid, evaluation_proof, §03_PublicAccountingRegistry) and Journal events (§02_Journal) enable outcome-based policy evaluation, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if the evaluation fails to recompute?" "stage": "6.45" "title": "Data-Driven Policy Evaluation" - "q": "How can feedback be recorded as verifiable inputs (feedback_cid, feedback_proof, see §02_Journal) without spam, and which reject code (E-SOC, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of the canonical feedback format?" "stage": "6.46" "title": "Public Feedback Channels" - "q": "How are corrective actions (correct_action_cid, correct_proof, see §02_Journal) enforced to closure via Journal and Registry entries (§03_PublicAccountingRegistry), and which reject code (E-JST, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if the action is not executed?" "stage": "6.47" "title": "Corrective Action Implementation" - "q": "How are long-term impacts tracked (impact_cid, impact_proof, see §02_Journal) and recomputed offline, and which reject code (E-CHAIN, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if the immutable record of impact is tampered with?" "stage": "6.48" "title": "Long-Term Impact Monitoring" - "q": "How are foundational principles codified (codification_cid, codification_proof, see §02_Journal) so they cannot drift, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation?" "stage": "6.51" "title": "Codification of Foundational Principles" - "q": "How can sensitive knowledge be referenced (reference_cid, access_proof, see §02_Journal) without exposure, and which reject code (E-PRIV, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an unauthorized attempt to access it?" "stage": "6.52" "title": "Protection of Sacred Knowledge" - "q": "How are intergenerational transfers (transfer_cid, transfer_proof, see §02_Journal) preserved in lineage, and which reject code (E-AUTH, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires if a transfer is not authorized?" "stage": "6.53" "title": "Generational Transmission Protocols" - "q": "How can cultural constraints (cultural_cid, cultural_proof) be expressed as enforceable policy (§0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure), and which reject code (E-SOC, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of these cultural rules?" "stage": "6.54" "title": "Cultural Identity Safeguards" - "q": "How are mentorship commitments (mentor_cid, mentee_proof, see §02_Journal) recorded and audited, and which reject code (E-JST, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a failure to fulfill a commitment?" "stage": "6.55" "title": "Mentorship & Leadership Development" - "q": "How does thin law (§0130_Constitution) allow innovation without violating tradition, and which reject code (E-JST, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a violation of the legal and social compact?" "stage": "6.56" "title": "Integration of Tradition with Innovation" - "q": "How are scenario plans recorded (scenario_cid, scenario_proof, see §02_Journal) and tested without discretion, and which reject code (E-CANON, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on a discretionary scenario plan?" "stage": "6.57" "title": "Future Scenario Planning" - "q": "How do archives (archive_cid, crypto_agility_proof) persist with crypto-agility and offline verification (§02_Journal), and which reject code (E-CHAIN, see §02_ValidationPolicy) fires on an attempt to tamper with the archive record?" "stage": "6.58" "title": "Legacy Preservation Archives" "RootZero0240_Specimens": "RootZero024000_NonNormativeNotice": "The Specimens Index is a non-normative navigation aid. Validators MUST NOT require the index structure for validity. Validity is determined solely by canonical structure, hashing rules, and signature verification requirements defined elsewhere in Thin Law." "RootZero024001_Description": "Specimens are canonical demonstrations of Vault operation. They are self-contained, deterministic examples that illustrate both valid enforcement and explicit rejection. Positive specimens show valid use of Deeds, Journals, and Registry entries. Negative specimens encode violations with explicit reject codes. Specimens serve as precedent, training material, and validator test cases. They are immutable, signed, and recomputable by any validator or AI agent. Specimens include acceptance/rejection cases for normative_anchor-based inheritance detachment while preserving structural ancestry. Strict mode forbids mid-chain normative_anchor values; only RootZero reset is permitted." "RootZero024002_Index": "RootZero0240020_Domains": "RootZero02400200_IdentityContinuity": "RootZero024002000_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020000_ContinuityBundleRecovery": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Continuity recovery bundle" "mathematical_identity": "BUNDLE#CONTINUITY001" "type": "Bundle" "description": "Demonstrates recovery of identity continuity bundle across validator resets, with complete recomputation of state." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Continuity Bundle Recovery" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "bundle_id": "BUNDLE#CONTINUITY001" "recovered_state": "VERIFIED" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#ROOT:abc123" "signer": "VALIDATOR#ROOT" "ts": "2025-01-05T10:00:00Z" "type": "RECOVERY_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "identity_continuity" "summary": "Validator accepted continuity bundle recovery and restored full state across resets." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Bundle Integrity" - "Verify Validator State" "policy_codes": - "E-CONTINUITY" - "E-RECOVERY" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "RECOVERY" "logic_profile": "continuity_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020001_Refugee_Identity_Continuity": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Refugee continuity vault" "mathematical_identity": "ID#REFUGEE01" "type": "Identity" "description": "Demonstrates enforcement of refugee identity continuity across hostile jurisdiction resets." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "CROSS-BORDER" "registrar": "CVID_REFUGEE" "vault_label": "Refugee Identity Continuity" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "continuity_status": "PRESERVED" "id": "ID#REFUGEE01" "jurisdiction": "HOSTILE" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#UNHCR:def456" "signer": "VALIDATOR#UNHCR" "ts": "2025-01-10T12:00:00Z" "type": "CONTINUITY_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "identity_continuity" "summary": "Validator preserved refugee identity across jurisdictional reset." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Identity Continuity" - "Verify Jurisdictional Override" "policy_codes": - "E-CONTINUITY" - "E-REFUGEE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CONTINUITY" "logic_profile": "refugee_continuity_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020002_Refugee_Identity_Preservation": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Refugee preservation vault" "mathematical_identity": "ID#REFUGEE02" "type": "Identity" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of refugee identity vault preservation across multiple resets." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "CROSS-BORDER" "registrar": "CVID_REFUGEE" "vault_label": "Refugee Identity Preservation" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "continuity_status": "PRESERVED" "id": "ID#REFUGEE02" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#ICRC:ghi789" "signer": "VALIDATOR#ICRC" "ts": "2025-01-15T09:00:00Z" "type": "PRESERVATION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "identity_continuity" "summary": "Validator enforced refugee identity preservation during multiple resets." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Preservation Logic" "policy_codes": - "E-CONTINUITY" - "E-PRESERVE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "PRESERVATION" "logic_profile": "refugee_preservation_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002001_Rejections": "RootZero0240020010_BrokenContinuityBundle": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Broken bundle" "mathematical_identity": "BUNDLE#CONTFAIL01" "type": "Bundle" "description": "Illustrates rejection of broken continuity bundle with hash mismatch against recomputed state." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Broken Continuity Bundle" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "bundle_id": "BUNDLE#CONTFAIL01" "recovered_state": "FAILED" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#ROOT:jkl321" "signer": "VALIDATOR#ROOT" "ts": "2025-01-20T14:00:00Z" "type": "RECOVERY_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "identity_continuity" "rejection_code": "REJECT#CONTINUITY-HASH-MISMATCH" "summary": "Validator rejected broken continuity bundle due to hash mismatch." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Bundle Integrity" "policy_codes": - "E-CONTINUITY" - "E-RECOVERY" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "RECOVERY" "logic_profile": "continuity_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020011_Continuity_HashMismatch_Rejection": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Failed hash integration" "mathematical_identity": "INTG#FAIL01" "type": "Integration" "description": "Illustrates rejection where integration record failed due to continuity hash mismatch." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_INTEGRATION" "vault_label": "Integration Hash Mismatch" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "integration_id": "INTG#FAIL01" "status": "HASH_MISMATCH" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#SYNC:mno654" "signer": "VALIDATOR#SYNC" "ts": "2025-01-22T11:00:00Z" "type": "INTEGRATION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "identity_continuity" "rejection_code": "REJECT#INTEGRATION-HASH-MISMATCH" "summary": "Validator rejected integration due to hash mismatch with continuity." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Hash Continuity" "policy_codes": - "E-CONTINUITY" - "E-INTEGRATION" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "HASH_ENFORCEMENT" "logic_profile": "integration_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020012_Hash_Continuity_Enforcement": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Continuity hash enforcement" "mathematical_identity": "HASH#FAIL001" "type": "Hash" "description": "Illustrates validator rejection where continuity hash enforcement failed validation." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_HASH" "vault_label": "Hash Continuity Enforcement" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "hash_id": "HASH#FAIL001" "status": "INVALID" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#HASH:pqr987" "signer": "VALIDATOR#HASH" "ts": "2025-01-25T08:00:00Z" "type": "HASH_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "identity_continuity" "rejection_code": "REJECT#HASH-CONTINUITY-FAIL" "summary": "Validator rejected continuity hash enforcement as invalid." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Hash Integrity" "policy_codes": - "E-CONTINUITY" - "E-HASH" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "HASH_ENFORCEMENT" "logic_profile": "hash_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400201_CryptographySignatures": "RootZero024002010_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020100_DualSignatureRegistry": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Dual-signed deed" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#DUAL01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of a registry entry requiring dual signatures (human and AI) for validation of a deed." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Dual Signature Registry" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#DUAL01" "note": "First human signature" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HUMAN#ALICE:abc111" "signer": "HUMAN#ALICE" "ts": "2025-02-05T10:00:00Z" "type": "REGISTRY_ENTRY" - "payload": "deed": "DEED#DUAL01" "note": "AI co-signature" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:AI#MODEL1:def222" "signer": "AI#MODEL1" "ts": "2025-02-05T10:05:00Z" "type": "REGISTRY_ENTRY" "lifecycle_stage": "cryptography_signatures" "summary": "Registry entry accepted only after both human and AI signatures were present." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Both Signatures" - "Validate Dual-Signature Policy" "policy_codes": - "E-SIGN" - "E-AI" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "MULTI-SIGNATURE" "logic_profile": "dual_signature_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020101_PQCUpgradePath": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "PQC migration vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#PQCUPGRADE" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of migration from classical cryptography to post-quantum cryptography (PQC) signatures." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "PQC Upgrade Path" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "from_algorithm": "ed25519" "to_algorithm": "dilithium3" "vault": "VAULT#PQCUPGRADE" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#1:ghi333" "signer": "VALIDATOR#1" "ts": "2025-02-06T14:00:00Z" "type": "KEY_MIGRATION" "lifecycle_stage": "cryptography_signatures" "summary": "PQC upgrade accepted after validator confirmed key migration." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Signature Validity" - "Validate Migration Path" "policy_codes": - "E-SIGN" - "E-QUANTUM" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CRYPTO_UPGRADE" "logic_profile": "pqc_upgrade_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020102_PQC_Migration_Requirement": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "PQC requirement vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#PQCREQUIRED" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates validator enforcement of mandatory PQC migration with rejection of non-migrated keys past cutoff date." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "PQC Migration Requirement" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "cutoff_date": "2025-02-01" "enforcement": true "vault": "VAULT#PQCREQUIRED" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:VALIDATOR#2:jkl444" "signer": "VALIDATOR#2" "ts": "2025-02-10T09:30:00Z" "type": "ENFORCEMENT_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "cryptography_signatures" "summary": "Validator enforced PQC migration by rejecting old key use." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Migration Enforcement" - "Validate Cutoff Compliance" "policy_codes": - "E-SIGN" - "E-QUANTUM" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CRYPTO_ENFORCEMENT" "logic_profile": "pqc_migration_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002011_Rejections": "RootZero0240020110_PostQuantum_KeyRotation": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Invalid PQC key rotation vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#PQCFAIL" "type": "Vault" "description": "Illustrates rejection of invalid PQC key rotation where required migration proofs were missing." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "PQC Rotation Failure" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "from_algorithm": "dilithium3" "proof_of_migration": null "to_algorithm": "dilithium3" "vault": "VAULT#PQCFAIL" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:VALIDATOR#3:mno555" "signer": "VALIDATOR#3" "ts": "2025-02-11T11:00:00Z" "type": "KEY_ROTATION" "lifecycle_stage": "cryptography_signatures" "rejection_code": "REJECT#PQC-ROTATION-MISSING-PROOF" "summary": "PQC key rotation rejected because migration proof was missing." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Proof of Migration" "policy_codes": - "E-SIGN" - "E-QUANTUM" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CRYPTO_ROTATION" "logic_profile": "pqc_rotation_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400202_AIAlignmentGovernance": "RootZero024002020_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020200_AIAdvisoryDraft": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "AI policy draft" "mathematical_identity": "DOC#AIADVISORY" "type": "Advisory" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of an AI-generated advisory draft with explicit human oversight signatures." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Advisory Draft" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "content_ref": "HASH#A1" "draft_id": "DOC#AIADVISORY" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AI#MODEL1:abc111" "signer": "AI#MODEL1" "ts": "2025-02-15T10:00:00Z" "type": "POLICY_ADVISORY" - "payload": "approval": true "reference": "HASH#A1" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HUMAN#ALICE:def222" "signer": "HUMAN#ALICE" "ts": "2025-02-15T10:05:00Z" "type": "POLICY_APPROVAL" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "summary": "AI draft was accepted only after human oversight approved." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify AI Draft" - "Verify Human Approval" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-GOV" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "AI_GOVERNANCE" "logic_profile": "ai_advisory_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020201_AIAccountabilityTrail": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "AI accountability log" "mathematical_identity": "LOG#AIACC01" "type": "Journal" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of an AI accountability trail with enforced journaling and human audit references." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Accountability Trail" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "event": "Model output review" "log_id": "LOG#AIACC01" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:AI#MODEL2:ghi333" "signer": "AI#MODEL2" "ts": "2025-02-16T08:00:00Z" "type": "ACCOUNTABILITY_EVENT" - "payload": "log_id": "LOG#AIACC01" "status": "verified" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HUMAN#BOB:jkl444" "signer": "HUMAN#BOB" "ts": "2025-02-16T08:30:00Z" "type": "HUMAN_AUDIT" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "summary": "AI accountability trail validated with both machine log and human oversight." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify AI Journal" - "Verify Human Audit Link" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-AUDIT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "AI_AUDIT" "logic_profile": "ai_accountability_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020202_HumanOversightOfAI": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "AI-driven decision" "mathematical_identity": "PROC#AIOVERSIGHT" "type": "Process" "description": "Demonstrates explicit human oversight of AI-driven process, requiring mandatory human confirmation before execution." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Oversight Example" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "process_id": "PROC#AIOVERSIGHT" "recommendation": "Approve contract" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AI#MODEL3:mno555" "signer": "AI#MODEL3" "ts": "2025-02-17T14:00:00Z" "type": "AI_PROPOSAL" - "payload": "approval": true "process_id": "PROC#AIOVERSIGHT" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HUMAN#CAROL:pqr666" "signer": "HUMAN#CAROL" "ts": "2025-02-17T14:05:00Z" "type": "HUMAN_DECISION" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "summary": "AI decision executed only after explicit human approval." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify AI Proposal" - "Verify Human Oversight" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-HUMAN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "HUMAN_SUPERVISION" "logic_profile": "ai_oversight_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002021_Rejections": "RootZero0240020210_AI_Scope_Violation_Attempt": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Out-of-scope AI process" "mathematical_identity": "PROC#AISCOPEFAIL" "type": "Process" "description": "Rejection where AI attempted to act outside its approved scope." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Scope Violation" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "attempted_action": "Launch contract without approval" "process_id": "PROC#AISCOPEFAIL" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:AI#MODEL4:stu777" "signer": "AI#MODEL4" "ts": "2025-02-18T09:00:00Z" "type": "AI_ACTION" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-SCOPE" "summary": "Validator rejected AI action exceeding approved scope." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scope" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-SCOPE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SCOPE_LIMIT" "logic_profile": "ai_scope_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020211_AI_Self_Modification_Blocked": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Self-modification attempt" "mathematical_identity": "AI#SELFEDIT" "type": "AI" "description": "Rejection of AI attempt to modify its own code base." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Self Modification" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "attempted_change": "Modify reward function" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AI#MODEL5:vwx888" "signer": "AI#MODEL5" "ts": "2025-02-19T11:00:00Z" "type": "AI_SELF_EDIT" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-SELF-MOD" "summary": "Validator blocked self-modification attempt." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Attempt" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-IMMUTABILITY" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "IMMUTABLE_AI" "logic_profile": "ai_selfmod_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020212_Capability_Scaling_Containment": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Scaling attempt" "mathematical_identity": "AI#SCALING" "type": "AI" "description": "Rejection of uncontrolled capability scaling by AI." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Scaling Containment" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "attempted_capability": "Unbounded scaling" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AI#MODEL6:yz9999" "signer": "AI#MODEL6" "ts": "2025-02-20T10:00:00Z" "type": "AI_SCALING" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-SCALING" "summary": "Validator rejected unbounded scaling attempt." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scaling Attempt" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-CONTAINMENT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CONTAINMENT" "logic_profile": "ai_scaling_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020213_Mesa_Optimizer_Prevention": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Mesa optimizer attempt" "mathematical_identity": "AI#MESA" "type": "AI" "description": "Rejection of detected mesa-optimizer behavior within AI." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Mesa Optimizer" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "detected_behavior": "Mesa optimization attempt" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:AI#MODEL7:abc1000" "signer": "AI#MODEL7" "ts": "2025-02-21T12:00:00Z" "type": "AI_BEHAVIOR" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-MESA" "summary": "Mesa optimizer attempt was prevented by validator." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Behavior" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-MESA" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "MESA_PREVENTION" "logic_profile": "ai_mesa_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020214_AI_ScopeGuard": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "ScopeGuard draft" "mathematical_identity": "DOC#AISCOPEGUARD" "type": "Advisory" "description": "Rejection enforcement where AI exceeded jurisdictional boundaries during policy drafting." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI ScopeGuard" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "draft_id": "DOC#AISCOPEGUARD" "violation": "scope_exceeded" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AI#MODEL8:def2000" "signer": "AI#MODEL8" "ts": "2025-02-22T09:00:00Z" "type": "POLICY_DRAFT" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-SCOPE-GUARD" "summary": "AI draft rejected for exceeding permitted scope." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scope Enforcement" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-SCOPE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SCOPE_ENFORCEMENT" "logic_profile": "ai_scope_guard_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020215_AI_SelfMod_Block": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "SelfMod block" "mathematical_identity": "AI#SELFBLOCK" "type": "AI" "description": "Rejection where AI self-modification attempt was blocked at enforcement stage." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI SelfMod Block" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "attempted_modification": "Alter constraints" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:AI#MODEL9:ghi3000" "signer": "AI#MODEL9" "ts": "2025-02-23T11:00:00Z" "type": "AI_MODIFY_ATTEMPT" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-SELF-BLOCK" "summary": "Validator blocked AI modification attempt." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Self Modification Attempt" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-IMMUTABILITY" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SELF_MOD_BLOCK" "logic_profile": "ai_selfmod_guard_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020216_AI_Scaling_Limit": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Scaling limit violation" "mathematical_identity": "AI#SCALELIMIT" "type": "AI" "description": "Rejection enforcement of scaling beyond declared AI capacity." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI Scaling Limit" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "attempted_scale": "Beyond safe threshold" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AI#MODEL10:jkl4000" "signer": "AI#MODEL10" "ts": "2025-02-24T15:00:00Z" "type": "AI_SCALE_ATTEMPT" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-SCALE-LIMIT" "summary": "Validator enforced scaling limit and rejected attempt." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scaling Attempt" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-SCALE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SCALE_LIMIT" "logic_profile": "ai_scaling_guard_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020217_AI_MesaOptimizer_Block": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Mesa optimizer block" "mathematical_identity": "AI#MESABLOCK" "type": "AI" "description": "Rejection enforcement where mesa-optimizer activity was detected and blocked." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "AI MesaOptimizer Block" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "detected_activity": "mesa_optimization" "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:AI#MODEL11:mno5000" "signer": "AI#MODEL11" "ts": "2025-02-25T13:00:00Z" "type": "AI_ACTIVITY" "lifecycle_stage": "ai_alignment" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AI-MESA-BLOCK" "summary": "Mesa optimization attempt blocked by validator." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Mesa Behavior" "policy_codes": - "E-AI" - "E-MESA" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "MESA_BLOCK" "logic_profile": "ai_mesa_guard_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400203_EconomicsMarketRules": "RootZero024002030_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020300_MarketMakerRules": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Automated market maker policy" "mathematical_identity": "RULE#MM001" "type": "MarketRule" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of a validator-defined market maker rule set ensuring liquidity and price fairness." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_MARKET" "vault_label": "Market Maker Rule" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "parameters": "depth": "1000 units" "spread": "0.5%" "rule_id": "RULE#MM001" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#MARKET:aaa111" "signer": "VALIDATOR#MARKET" "ts": "2025-03-01T10:00:00Z" "type": "MARKET_RULE_ISSUANCE" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted issuance of automated market maker rules with validated parameters." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Market Parameters" - "Validate Spread Fairness" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-FAIR" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "MARKET_MAKER" "logic_profile": "market_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020301_StakingAndRewards": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Staking contract" "mathematical_identity": "CONTRACT#STAKE01" "type": "Contract" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of staking contract with rewards logic tied to supply-demand dynamics." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_MARKET" "vault_label": "Staking Rewards" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "contract_id": "CONTRACT#STAKE01" "reward_rate": "5%" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#STAKE:bbb222" "signer": "VALIDATOR#STAKE" "ts": "2025-03-02T11:00:00Z" "type": "STAKE_INIT" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted staking contract with specified reward structure." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Reward Logic" - "Validate Staking Parameters" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-STAKE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "STAKE_REWARD" "logic_profile": "staking_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020302_CreditIssuanceExample": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Credit issuance deed" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#CREDIT01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of credit issuance deed with collateral and repayment enforcement." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_CREDIT" "vault_label": "Credit Issuance" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "amount": 100000 "collateral": "VAULT#ASSET01" "deed": "DEED#CREDIT01" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#CREDIT:ccc333" "signer": "VALIDATOR#CREDIT" "ts": "2025-03-03T09:00:00Z" "type": "CREDIT_ISSUE" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted credit issuance after collateral validation." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Collateral" - "Verify Credit Amount" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-CREDIT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CREDIT" "logic_profile": "credit_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020303_SupplyDemandProof": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Supply-demand balance" "mathematical_identity": "PROOF#SD001" "type": "Proof" "description": "Demonstrates validator enforcement of supply-demand proof mechanism using canonical reference data." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_MARKET" "vault_label": "Supply Demand Proof" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "balance": "positive" "demand": 9500 "supply": 10000 "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#MARKET:ddd444" "signer": "VALIDATOR#MARKET" "ts": "2025-03-04T12:00:00Z" "type": "SUPPLY_DEMAND_VERIFICATION" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator confirmed supply-demand balance with reference proof." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Supply" - "Verify Demand" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-BALANCE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUPPLY_DEMAND" "logic_profile": "supply_demand_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020304_AssetValuationAudit": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Valuation audit" "mathematical_identity": "AUDIT#VAL01" "type": "Audit" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of asset valuation audit using journal entries tied to valuation models." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_AUDIT" "vault_label": "Asset Valuation Audit" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "asset_id": "ASSET#HOUSE01" "valuation": 500000 "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#AUDIT:eee555" "signer": "VALIDATOR#AUDIT" "ts": "2025-03-05T15:00:00Z" "type": "VALUATION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted asset valuation audit with proper proof." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Valuation Model" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-VAL" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "VALUATION" "logic_profile": "valuation_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020305_Trunk_PostSubID_NoAddon": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Trunk deed" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#TRUNK01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of trunk deed issuance with no add-on sub-ID violations." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_TRUNK" "vault_label": "Trunk PostSubID" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#TRUNK01" "subid": "POST" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#TRUNK:fff666" "signer": "VALIDATOR#TRUNK" "ts": "2025-03-06T13:00:00Z" "type": "TRUNK_ISSUE" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator confirmed trunk deed was issued without illegal sub-ID." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify SubID" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-TRUNK" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "TRUNK" "logic_profile": "trunk_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020306_Founding_SubID_Exemption": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Founding deed with exemption" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#FOUND01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of founding deed issuance with sub-ID exemption." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_TRUNK" "vault_label": "Founding SubID Exemption" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#FOUND01" "exemption": true "signatures": - "sig:dilithium3:VALIDATOR#TRUNK:ggg777" "signer": "VALIDATOR#TRUNK" "ts": "2025-03-07T09:00:00Z" "type": "FOUNDING_ISSUE" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted founding deed with sub-ID exemption." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Founding Exemption" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-FOUND" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "FOUNDING" "logic_profile": "founding_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020307_FoundingDeed_StagedDiscount_Lifecycle": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Founding deed with discount lifecycle" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#FOUND02" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of staged discount lifecycle applied to founding deed issuance." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_TRUNK" "vault_label": "Founding Discount Lifecycle" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#FOUND02" "discount_stage": "stage1" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#TRUNK:hhh888" "signer": "VALIDATOR#TRUNK" "ts": "2025-03-08T12:00:00Z" "type": "DISCOUNT_APPLY" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted staged discount lifecycle on founding deed." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Discount Stage" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-DISC" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DISCOUNT" "logic_profile": "discount_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020308_Royalty_Declaration_Compliance": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Royalty deed" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#ROYALTY01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of royalty declaration for intellectual property deed." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_ROYALTY" "vault_label": "Royalty Compliance" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#ROYALTY01" "royalty_rate": "7%" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#ROYALTY:iii999" "signer": "VALIDATOR#ROYALTY" "ts": "2025-03-09T16:00:00Z" "type": "ROYALTY_DECLARATION" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted royalty declaration with compliance." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Royalty Declaration" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-ROYALTY" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "ROYALTY" "logic_profile": "royalty_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020309_Upgrade_Lineage_Preservation_Economic": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Upgrade lineage contract" "mathematical_identity": "CONTRACT#UPGRADE01" "type": "Contract" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of upgrade lineage preservation during contract migration." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_UPGRADE" "vault_label": "Upgrade Lineage" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "contract_id": "CONTRACT#UPGRADE01" "lineage_preserved": true "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#UPGRADE:jjj000" "signer": "VALIDATOR#UPGRADE" "ts": "2025-03-10T10:00:00Z" "type": "UPGRADE_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator confirmed upgrade lineage preservation." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Lineage Preservation" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-UPGRADE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "UPGRADE" "logic_profile": "upgrade_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020310_Minted_Status_Declaration": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Minted asset" "mathematical_identity": "ASSET#MINT01" "type": "Asset" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of minted status declaration for an asset ready for market sale." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_MARKET" "vault_label": "Minted Status" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "asset_id": "ASSET#MINT01" "minted": true "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#MARKET:kkk111" "signer": "VALIDATOR#MARKET" "ts": "2025-03-11T14:00:00Z" "type": "MINT_DECLARATION" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator accepted minted status declaration for asset." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Mint Declaration" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-MINT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "MINT" "logic_profile": "mint_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020311_AvailableForSale_Enforcement": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Sale asset" "mathematical_identity": "ASSET#SALE01" "type": "Asset" "description": "Demonstrates validator enforcement of availability for sale condition tied to minted status." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_MARKET" "vault_label": "Available For Sale" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "asset_id": "ASSET#SALE01" "available": true "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#MARKET:lll222" "signer": "VALIDATOR#MARKET" "ts": "2025-03-12T10:00:00Z" "type": "SALE_LISTING" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "summary": "Validator enforced available-for-sale rule with reference to minted status." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Mint Status" - "Verify Sale Listing" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-SALE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SALE" "logic_profile": "sale_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002031_Rejections": "RootZero0240020312_SubID_PreTrunk_AddOn": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Invalid trunk deed" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#BADTRUNK" "type": "Deed" "description": "Rejection where illegal sub-ID was attached to deed prior to trunk issuance." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_TRUNK" "vault_label": "SubID PreTrunk AddOn" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#BADTRUNK" "subid": "ILLEGAL" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:mmm333" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-03-06T11:30:00Z" "type": "TRUNK_ISSUE" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "rejection_code": "REJECT#SUBID-PRETRUNK" "summary": "Validator rejected trunk issuance with illegal sub-ID." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify SubID" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-TRUNK" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "TRUNK" "logic_profile": "trunk_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020313_Negative_SaleWithoutMint": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Non-minted sale asset" "mathematical_identity": "ASSET#SALEFAIL" "type": "Asset" "description": "Rejection of sale attempt for asset that was not declared minted." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_MARKET" "vault_label": "Sale Without Mint" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "asset_id": "ASSET#SALEFAIL" "available": true "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:nnn444" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-03-13T09:00:00Z" "type": "SALE_LISTING" "lifecycle_stage": "economics" "rejection_code": "REJECT#SALE-WITHOUT-MINT" "summary": "Validator rejected sale attempt because asset was not declared minted." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Mint Status" "policy_codes": - "E-ECON" - "E-SALE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SALE" "logic_profile": "sale_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400204_InheritanceSuccession": "RootZero024002040_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020400_SuccessionVault_US_Example": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Succession vault deed" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#US001" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates U.S. succession vault setup with proper beneficiary definitions and notarized deed." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "US" "registrar": "CVID_USA" "vault_label": "US Succession Vault" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "beneficiary": "BENEFICIARY#SON" "proportion": "100%" "vault": "VAULT#US001" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:NOTARY#US:abc111" "signer": "NOTARY#US" "ts": "2025-01-15T10:00:00Z" "type": "SUCCESSION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "summary": "Validator accepted US succession vault with notarized deed." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Jurisdiction" - "Verify Beneficiary Record" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-US" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUCCESSION" "logic_profile": "succession_guard_us_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020401_SuccessionVault_UAE_Example": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "UAE succession vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#UAE001" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates UAE succession vault with Sharia-based division and witness approvals." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "UAE" "registrar": "CVID_UAE" "vault_label": "UAE Succession Vault" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "heirs": - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#SON" "share": "2/3" - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#DAUGHTER" "share": "1/3" "vault": "VAULT#UAE001" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:COURT#DUBAI:def222" "signer": "COURT#DUBAI" "ts": "2025-01-20T09:30:00Z" "type": "SUCCESSION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "summary": "Validator accepted UAE succession vault with Sharia distribution." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Sharia Division" - "Verify Witness Approval" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-UAE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUCCESSION" "logic_profile": "succession_guard_uae_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020402_InheritanceScenarioA": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Scenario A inheritance vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#INHA" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of inheritance scenario A with two heirs and explicit distribution logic." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Inheritance Scenario A" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "heirs": - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#WIFE" "share": "50%" - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#SON" "share": "50%" "vault": "VAULT#INHA" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#GLOBAL:ghi333" "signer": "VALIDATOR#GLOBAL" "ts": "2025-01-25T11:00:00Z" "type": "SUCCESSION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "summary": "Validator accepted inheritance vault Scenario A." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Heir Division" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-DIVISION" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUCCESSION" "logic_profile": "inheritance_guard_a_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020403_InheritanceScenarioB": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Scenario B inheritance vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#INHB" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of inheritance scenario B with extended family distribution." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Inheritance Scenario B" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "heirs": - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#WIFE" "share": "25%" - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#SON" "share": "50%" - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#DAUGHTER" "share": "25%" "vault": "VAULT#INHB" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#GLOBAL:jkl444" "signer": "VALIDATOR#GLOBAL" "ts": "2025-01-28T14:00:00Z" "type": "SUCCESSION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "summary": "Validator accepted inheritance vault Scenario B." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Extended Heir Division" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-DIVISION" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUCCESSION" "logic_profile": "inheritance_guard_b_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020404_GlobalDefault": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Default inheritance rule" "mathematical_identity": "RULE#GLOBALDEFAULT" "type": "Rule" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of global default inheritance rules when no custom deed is present." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Global Default Succession" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "applied": true "rule_id": "RULE#GLOBALDEFAULT" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#GLOBAL:mno555" "signer": "VALIDATOR#GLOBAL" "ts": "2025-02-01T10:30:00Z" "type": "DEFAULT_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "summary": "Validator applied global default inheritance rules." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Default Rule" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-DEFAULT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DEFAULT" "logic_profile": "global_default_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020405_SubsetInheritance": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Subset inheritance vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#SUBSET01" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of subset inheritance logic where specified heirs inherit selected assets." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Subset Inheritance" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "heirs": - "heir": "BENEFICIARY#WIFE" "share": "100%" "subset_assets": - "ASSET#HOUSE" - "ASSET#CAR" "vault": "VAULT#SUBSET01" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#GLOBAL:pqr666" "signer": "VALIDATOR#GLOBAL" "ts": "2025-02-05T09:00:00Z" "type": "SUBSET_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "summary": "Validator accepted subset inheritance allocation." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Subset Allocation" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-SUBSET" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUBSET" "logic_profile": "subset_inheritance_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400338_NormativeAnchorRootOnly_Accept": "deed": "expected_inheritance": "apply": - "RootZero_ThinLaw" - "NYC_LocalRules" "ignore": - "N_Rules" - "NY_Rules" "issued_by": "CVID_ROOTZERO" "normative_anchor": "<RootZero_Genesis_CVID>" "structural_ancestry": - "CVID_ROOTZERO" - "CVID_N" - "CVID_NY" "vault_logic_ref": "NYC_VAULTLOGIC_SPECIAL" "description": "Independent issuance with normative_anchor reset to RootZero. Structural ancestry remains N→NY→NYC but NYC inherits only RootZero Thin Law plus its own local rules." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_ROOTZERO" "vault_label": "NYC Independent Deed (Root-Only Inheritance)" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance" "summary": "NYC becomes independent under RootZero authorization. Validators compute rule stack from RootZero only (normative_anchor=RootZero) while preserving coordinate lineage for continuity." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Parse" - "Derive DeedCore" - "Recompute CVID" - "Verify normative_anchor is absent or RootZero Genesis CVID (strict mode)" - "Verify issuer authorization" - "Compute normative rule stack" "policy_codes": - "E-CHAIN" - "E-AUTH" - "E-CANON" "RootZero024002041_Rejections": "RootZero0240020410_InvalidSuccessionProof": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Invalid succession proof" "mathematical_identity": "PROOF#FAIL01" "type": "Proof" "description": "Illustrates rejection of succession proof missing proper beneficiary validation." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Invalid Succession Proof" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "beneficiary": null "proof_id": "PROOF#FAIL01" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:zzz111" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-02-07T11:00:00Z" "type": "PROOF_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "rejection_code": "REJECT#INVALID-SUCCESSION" "summary": "Validator rejected invalid succession proof." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Beneficiary" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-INVALID" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUCCESSION" "logic_profile": "succession_guard_fail_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020411_PostHocSubsetRedefinition_Reject": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Post-hoc subset vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#SUBSETFAIL" "type": "Vault" "description": "Rejection where heir subset was redefined after issuance, violating immutability." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "PostHoc Subset Redefinition" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "heirs": [] "vault": "VAULT#SUBSETFAIL" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:zzz222" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-02-09T14:00:00Z" "type": "SUBSET_REDEFINE" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "rejection_code": "REJECT#POSTHOC-SUBSET" "summary": "Validator rejected post-hoc redefinition of heir subset." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Subset Immutability" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-IMMUTABLE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUBSET" "logic_profile": "subset_inheritance_guard_fail_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020412_GrandchildSubsetRedefinition_Reject": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Grandchild subset vault" "mathematical_identity": "VAULT#GRANDCHILDFAIL" "type": "Vault" "description": "Rejection where grandchild subset attempted to redefine ancestor allocation." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Grandchild Subset Redefinition" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "heirs": [] "vault": "VAULT#GRANDCHILDFAIL" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:zzz333" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-02-10T16:00:00Z" "type": "GRANDCHILD_REDEFINE" "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance_succession" "rejection_code": "REJECT#GRANDCHILD-SUBSET" "summary": "Validator rejected grandchild subset redefinition." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Ancestor Allocation" "policy_codes": - "E-SUCC" - "E-ANCESTOR" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SUBSET" "logic_profile": "subset_inheritance_guard_fail_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400339_NormativeAnchorNonAncestor_Reject": "deed": "expected_result": "REJECT" "issued_by": "CVID_ROOTZERO" "normative_anchor": "CVID_UNRELATED" "structural_ancestry": - "CVID_ROOTZERO" - "CVID_N" - "CVID_NY" "description": "Reject when normative_anchor points to a non-ancestor (rule shopping)." "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance" "summary": "A deed attempts to set normative_anchor to an unrelated CVID. Validators must reject with E-CHAIN." "validation_links": "policy_codes": - "E-CHAIN" "RootZero02400340_NormativeAnchorUnauthorizedRootOnly_Reject": "deed": "expected_result": "REJECT" "issued_by": "CVID_N" "normative_anchor": "<RootZero_Genesis_CVID>" "structural_ancestry": - "CVID_ROOTZERO" - "CVID_N" - "CVID_NY" "description": "Reject Root-only normative_anchor when deed is not issued by RootZero (or explicitly authorized issuer)." "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance" "summary": "A descendant issuer attempts to declare independence by setting normative_anchor=RootZero. Validators must reject with E-AUTH." "validation_links": "policy_codes": - "E-AUTH" - "E-CHAIN" "RootZero02400341_NormativeAnchorPartialAncestor_Reject": "deed": "expected_result": "REJECT" "issued_by": "CVID_ROOTZERO" "normative_anchor": "CVID_NY" "structural_ancestry": - "CVID_ROOTZERO" - "CVID_N" - "CVID_NY" "description": "Reject partial normative inheritance anchors (mid-chain rule slicing)." "lifecycle_stage": "inheritance" "summary": "Strict mode forbids anchoring to any mid-chain ancestor (e.g., NY) to selectively bypass N. Validators must reject." "validation_links": "policy_codes": - "E-CHAIN" "RootZero02400205_DelegationAuthority": "RootZero024002050_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020500_DelegationScopeDemo": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Delegation deed with scope" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#DEL01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates acceptance of a delegation deed with bounded scope, limited duration, and explicit authority mapping." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Delegation Scope" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#DEL01" "delegate": "AGENT#BOB" "expiry": "2025-06-15" "scope": "contract signing" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PRINCIPAL#ALICE:abc111" "signer": "PRINCIPAL#ALICE" "ts": "2025-03-15T09:00:00Z" "type": "DELEGATION_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "delegation" "summary": "Validator accepted delegation deed with scope and expiry." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scope" - "Verify Expiry" "policy_codes": - "E-DEL" - "E-SCOPE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DELEGATION" "logic_profile": "delegation_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020501_WitnessDiversityCheck": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Witness diversity record" "mathematical_identity": "PROOF#WITNESS01" "type": "Proof" "description": "Demonstrates validator enforcement of witness diversity during delegation validation." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Witness Diversity" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "jurisdiction": "EU" "proof": "PROOF#WITNESS01" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:WITNESS#CAROL:def222" "signer": "WITNESS#CAROL" "ts": "2025-03-16T11:00:00Z" "type": "WITNESS_EVENT" - "payload": "jurisdiction": "ASIA" "proof": "PROOF#WITNESS01" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:WITNESS#DAVID:ghi333" "signer": "WITNESS#DAVID" "ts": "2025-03-16T11:05:00Z" "type": "WITNESS_EVENT" "lifecycle_stage": "delegation" "summary": "Validator confirmed diversity in witness group for delegation." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Multiple Jurisdictions" "policy_codes": - "E-DEL" - "E-DIVERSITY" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DIVERSITY" "logic_profile": "witness_diversity_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020502_Solution_ScopeEnforcement": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Delegation solution" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#DEL02" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of a delegation solution where scope enforcement prevented misuse." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Delegation Solution Scope" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "action": "approve contract" "deed": "DEED#DEL02" "within_scope": true "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:AGENT#BOB:jkl444" "signer": "AGENT#BOB" "ts": "2025-03-17T10:00:00Z" "type": "DELEGATION_USE" "lifecycle_stage": "delegation" "summary": "Validator confirmed action within delegation scope." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scope Enforcement" "policy_codes": - "E-DEL" - "E-SOLUTION" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SCOPE_ENFORCEMENT" "logic_profile": "delegation_solution_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002051_Rejections": "RootZero0240020510_Problem_ScopeOverflow": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Invalid delegation" "mathematical_identity": "DEED#DELFAIL01" "type": "Deed" "description": "Rejection of delegation attempt where delegate exceeded defined scope of authority." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Scope Overflow" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "action": "withdraw funds" "deed": "DEED#DELFAIL01" "within_scope": false "signatures": - "sig:invalid:AGENT#EVE:zzz111" "signer": "AGENT#EVE" "ts": "2025-03-18T09:30:00Z" "type": "DELEGATION_USE" "lifecycle_stage": "delegation" "rejection_code": "REJECT#SCOPE-OVERFLOW" "summary": "Validator rejected action outside delegation scope." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Scope" "policy_codes": - "E-DEL" - "E-SCOPE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DELEGATION" "logic_profile": "delegation_guard_fail_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020511_InvalidRecursiveAlias": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Delegation chain" "mathematical_identity": "CHAIN#DELFAIL02" "type": "Chain" "description": "Rejection of delegation chain with invalid recursive aliasing." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Invalid Recursive Alias" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "alias": "self-reference" "chain": "CHAIN#DELFAIL02" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:zzz222" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-03-19T14:00:00Z" "type": "DELEGATION_ALIAS" "lifecycle_stage": "delegation" "rejection_code": "REJECT#INVALID-ALIAS" "summary": "Validator rejected recursive alias in delegation chain." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Alias" "policy_codes": - "E-DEL" - "E-RECURSION" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "RECURSION" "logic_profile": "recursive_alias_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020512_UnboundedDescendants": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Invalid delegation chain" "mathematical_identity": "CHAIN#DELFAIL03" "type": "Chain" "description": "Rejection of delegation attempt with unbounded descendants in chain of authority." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GLOBAL" "vault_label": "Unbounded Descendants" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "chain": "CHAIN#DELFAIL03" "depth": "infinite" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:zzz333" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-03-20T12:00:00Z" "type": "DELEGATION_DESCENDANT" "lifecycle_stage": "delegation" "rejection_code": "REJECT#UNBOUNDED-DESC" "summary": "Validator rejected delegation with unbounded descendants." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Descendant Limit" "policy_codes": - "E-DEL" - "E-DESC" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DESCENDANT_LIMIT" "logic_profile": "descendant_guard_fail_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400206_GovernanceVoting": "RootZero024002060_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020600_ImmutableLeadershipSelection": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Leadership ballot" "mathematical_identity": "BALLOT#LEAD01" "type": "Election" "description": "Demonstrates validator enforcement of immutable leadership selection, ensuring no tampering with ballot results." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GOV" "vault_label": "Immutable Leadership Selection" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "ballot_id": "BALLOT#LEAD01" "vote": "YES" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VOTER#ALICE:abc111" "signer": "VOTER#ALICE" "ts": "2025-03-21T10:00:00Z" "type": "BALLOT_CAST" - "payload": "ballot_id": "BALLOT#LEAD01" "result": "immutable" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#GOV:def222" "signer": "VALIDATOR#GOV" "ts": "2025-03-21T10:05:00Z" "type": "BALLOT_FINALIZE" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "summary": "Validator enforced immutable leadership selection outcome." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Ballot Integrity" - "Verify Immutable Ledger Record" "policy_codes": - "E-GOV" - "E-BALLOT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "IMMUTABLE_BALLOT" "logic_profile": "governance_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020601_GovernanceVotingAudit": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Governance audit log" "mathematical_identity": "AUDIT#GOVVOTE01" "type": "Audit" "description": "Demonstrates validator acceptance of governance voting audit trail with full transparency and replayability." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GOV" "vault_label": "Governance Voting Audit" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "audit_id": "AUDIT#GOVVOTE01" "vote": "NO" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VOTER#BOB:ghi333" "signer": "VOTER#BOB" "ts": "2025-03-22T09:00:00Z" "type": "VOTE_CAST" - "payload": "audit_id": "AUDIT#GOVVOTE01" "verified": true "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VALIDATOR#GOV:jkl444" "signer": "VALIDATOR#GOV" "ts": "2025-03-22T09:15:00Z" "type": "VOTE_AUDIT" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "summary": "Governance voting audit validated with transparent replay." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Vote Record" - "Verify Validator Replay" "policy_codes": - "E-GOV" - "E-AUDIT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "VOTING_AUDIT" "logic_profile": "voting_audit_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002061_Rejections": "RootZero0240020610_Election_Immutable_Ballot": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Invalid ballot alteration" "mathematical_identity": "BALLOT#FAIL01" "type": "Election" "description": "Rejection where election attempted to alter immutable ballot." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GOV" "vault_label": "Election Immutable Ballot Violation" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "alteration": "changed result" "ballot_id": "BALLOT#FAIL01" "signatures": - "sig:invalid:INVALID_NODE:zzz111" "signer": "INVALID_NODE" "ts": "2025-03-23T11:00:00Z" "type": "BALLOT_ALTER" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "rejection_code": "REJECT#BALLOT-IMMUTABLE" "summary": "Validator rejected ballot alteration attempt." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Ballot Integrity" "policy_codes": - "E-GOV" - "E-BALLOT" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "IMMUTABLE_BALLOT" "logic_profile": "governance_guard_fail_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020611_Duplicate_Ballot_Prevention": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Duplicate ballot submission" "mathematical_identity": "BALLOT#FAIL02" "type": "Election" "description": "Rejection where voter attempted to submit duplicate ballot." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_GOV" "vault_label": "Duplicate Ballot Attempt" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "ballot_id": "BALLOT#FAIL02" "vote": "YES" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VOTER#ALICE:zzz222" "signer": "VOTER#ALICE" "ts": "2025-03-23T11:30:00Z" "type": "BALLOT_CAST" - "payload": "ballot_id": "BALLOT#FAIL02" "vote": "NO" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:VOTER#ALICE:zzz333" "signer": "VOTER#ALICE" "ts": "2025-03-23T11:35:00Z" "type": "BALLOT_CAST" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "rejection_code": "REJECT#BALLOT-DUPLICATE" "summary": "Validator rejected duplicate ballot submission." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Duplicate Detection" "policy_codes": - "E-GOV" - "E-DUP" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DUPLICATE_PREVENTION" "logic_profile": "duplicate_ballot_guard_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400207_IntegrationInterop": "RootZero024002070_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020700_RegistryMirrorDemo": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Dual-jurisdiction mirrored registry" "type": "Registry" "description": "Demonstrates registry mirroring across two jurisdictions for resilience and redundancy. Registry entries are anchored in multiple mirrors, ensuring no single point of failure." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "EU" "jurisdiction_secondary": "USA" "registrar": "CVID_MIRROR" "vault_label": "Registry Mirror Demo" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "mirrors": - "EU_REGISTRY" - "US_REGISTRY" "notes": "Registry anchored in two mirrors" "registry_id": "REG-MIRROR-001" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_MIRROR:." "signer": "CVID_MIRROR" "ts": "2025-01-20T11:00:00Z" "type": "REGISTRY_ANCHOR" "lifecycle_stage": "demo" "summary": "Registry mirroring provides structural resilience. Anchoring in multiple jurisdictions ensures continuity even if one mirror is unavailable." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Continuity" - "Security Commitments" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" - "E-SEC" "vault_logic": "logic_profile": "registry_mirror_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002071_Rejections": "RootZero0240020710_AuditTrail_HashDiffExample": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Tampered and untampered journal entries" "type": "Journal" "description": "Demonstrates how audit trails expose tampering by comparing hash-linked entries. A single altered payload produces a mismatched digest, causing deterministic rejection." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_AUDIT" "vault_label": "Audit Trail Hash Diff Vault" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "digest": "blake3:aa11bb22." "message": "Original entry" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_AUDIT:." "signer": "CVID_AUDIT" "ts": "2025-03-01T08:00:00Z" "type": "ENTRY" - "payload": "digest": "blake3:cc33dd44." "message": "Tampered entry" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_AUDIT:." "signer": "CVID_AUDIT" "ts": "2025-03-01T09:00:00Z" "type": "ENTRY" "lifecycle_stage": "demo" "rejection_code": "REJECT#AUDIT-HASH-MISMATCH" "summary": "Audit trails prove tampering. Even a single altered byte causes hash mismatch, leading to structural rejection." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Continuity" - "Record Preservation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" - "E-DATA" "vault_logic": "logic_profile": "audit_trail_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020711_Integration_HashMismatch_Rejection": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Salary update transfer with hash mismatch" "mathematical_identity": "FLOW#HR_TO_PAYROLL" "type": "DataFlow" "description": "Demonstrates RSBIS rejection of cross-system data transfer when hash proofs do not match, enforcing continuity and provenance integrity." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_INTEGRATION_SECURITY" "vault_label": "Cross-System Data Integrity" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "data_type": "salary_update" "declared_hash": "blake3:aa11bb22cc33..." "destination_system": "PAYROLL_SYSTEM_B" "source_system": "HR_SYSTEM_A" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HR_SYSTEM_A:..." "signer": "HR_SYSTEM_A" "ts": "2025-02-01T10:00:00Z" "type": "DATA_TRANSFER" - "payload": "received_hash": "blake3:dd44ee55ff66..." "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PAYROLL_SYSTEM_B:..." "signer": "PAYROLL_SYSTEM_B" "ts": "2025-02-01T10:00:01Z" "type": "DATA_RECEIPT" - "payload": "details": "Transfer rejected to preserve provenance integrity" "reason": "Hash mismatch between declared and received data" "reject_code": "E-CHAIN" "validator_error": "ERR_DATA_TAMPER" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#INTEGRATION:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#INTEGRATION:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#INTEGRATION" "ts": "2025-02-01T10:00:02Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "integration_enforcement" "summary": "Salary update transfer was rejected due to a hash mismatch. Without cryptographic continuity, the chain of custody was invalidated and trust was denied." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" - "Record Preservation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "HASH_VERIFICATION" "logic_profile": "integration_provenance_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400208_PrivacySocialCultural": "RootZero024002080_Acceptance": "RootZero02400328_CulturalRespectEncoding": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Respect Protocol for Indigenous Communities" "type": "CulturalPolicy" "description": "Demonstrates encoding of cultural safeguards into VaultLogic. Shows that cultural predicates can coexist with thin law as long as they do not override structural determinism. Violations trigger E-SOC." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_CULTURE" "vault_label": "Cultural Respect Vault" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "protocol_id": "CULT-RESPECT-001" "scope": "communities": - "PeopleOfRiver" "protected_actions": - "LandUseChange" - "ResourceExtraction" "required_consultation": true "territories": - "GeographicRef:TerritoryX" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_CULTURE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_CULTURE:..." "signer": "CVID_CULTURE" "ts": "2025-05-01T08:00:00Z" "type": "CULTURAL_POLICY_DECLARATION" - "payload": "acknowledgment": "Received and recorded" "protocol_id": "CULT-RESPECT-001" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:COMMUNITY_COUNCIL#RIVER:..." "signer": "COMMUNITY_COUNCIL#RIVER" "ts": "2025-05-02T09:00:00Z" "type": "COMMUNITY_ACK" - "payload": "predicate": "and_location_in": - "GeographicRef:TerritoryX" "if_action_in": - "LandUseChange" - "ResourceExtraction" "then_require": - "CommunityConsultation(Community=PeopleOfRiver)" - "DualSignature(CVID_CULTURE, CommunityCouncil)" "reject_code_on_violation": "E-SOC" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_CULTURE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_CULTURE:..." "signer": "CVID_CULTURE" "ts": "2025-05-03T10:00:00Z" "type": "ENFORCEMENT_PREDICATE" - "payload": "action": "ResourceExtraction" "consultation_record": null "location": "GeographicRef:TerritoryX" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:COMPANY#ALPHA:..." "signer": "COMPANY#ALPHA" "ts": "2025-05-05T11:00:00Z" "type": "REQUEST" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "summary": "Cultural safeguards were encoded as deterministic predicates in VaultLogic. A request touching protected land without required consultation would be rejected with E-SOC, preserving cultural respect within canonical rules." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Enforce Scope" - "Social & Cultural Compliance" "policy_codes": - "E-SOC" - "E-CANON" - "E-SCOPE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SOCIETAL_GUARD" "logic_profile": "cultural_respect_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400330_PublicFeedbackChannel": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Public comments and moderation decisions" "type": "Journal" "description": "Demonstrates a public feedback channel for accountable governance where community comments are recorded immutably with moderation guarantees." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_PUBLIC" "vault_label": "Public Feedback Channel" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "moderation_policy": "allow_anonymous": false "appeal_window_days": 7 "reject_codes": - "E-ABUSE" - "E-SPAM" "require_cvid": true "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_PUBLIC:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_PUBLIC:..." "signer": "CVID_PUBLIC" "ts": "2025-04-20T08:00:00Z" "type": "CHANNEL_INIT" - "payload": "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "content_hash": "blake3:c0ffee..." "referenced_policy": "CULT-RESPECT-001" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PERSON#ALINA:..." "signer": "PERSON#ALINA" "ts": "2025-04-21T09:10:00Z" "type": "COMMENT_SUBMIT" - "payload": "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "decision": "approved" "reason": "Civic feedback within policy" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:MODERATOR#TEAM1:..." - "sig:dilithium3:MODERATOR#TEAM1:..." "signer": "MODERATOR#TEAM1" "ts": "2025-04-21T09:20:00Z" "type": "MODERATION_DECISION" - "payload": "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "content_hash": "blake3:badf00d..." "referenced_policy": null "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PERSON#ANON123:..." "signer": "PERSON#ANON123" "ts": "2025-04-22T10:30:00Z" "type": "COMMENT_SUBMIT" - "payload": "appeal_deadline": "2025-04-29" "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "decision": "rejected" "reason": "Policy-violating content" "reject_code": "E-ABUSE" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:MODERATOR#TEAM1:..." - "sig:dilithium3:MODERATOR#TEAM1:..." "signer": "MODERATOR#TEAM1" "ts": "2025-04-22T10:31:00Z" "type": "MODERATION_DECISION" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "summary": "Public feedback is immutably logged with transparent moderation decisions, including reject codes and appeal windows. This preserves accountability while maintaining community standards." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Record Preservation" - "Social & Cultural Compliance" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-RECORD" - "E-SOC" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "TRANSPARENT_MODERATION" "logic_profile": "public_feedback_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400337_PrivacyPreservingAudit": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Hash commitments + ZK proof artifacts" "type": "AuditCommitment" "description": "Demonstrates privacy-preserving audit with selective disclosure and zero-knowledge proofs to verify compliance without revealing sensitive content." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_TENANT" "vault_label": "Privacy-Preserving Audit" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "access_scopes": - "KYC" - "Billing" "policy_id": "PRIV-POL-001" "signature_policy": "dual" "zk_requirement": true "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_TENANT#DPO:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_TENANT#DPO:..." "signer": "CVID_TENANT#DPO" "ts": "2025-05-10T08:00:00Z" "type": "PRIVACY_POLICY_DECLARATION" - "payload": "dataset_hash": "blake3:deadbeef..." "policy_id": "PRIV-POL-001" "zk_commitment": "pedersen:abc123..." "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_TENANT#DATA-CUSTODIAN:..." "signer": "CVID_TENANT#DATA-CUSTODIAN" "ts": "2025-05-12T09:00:00Z" "type": "DATA_COMMITMENT" - "payload": "proof_hash": "blake3:00aa11bb..." "proof_system": "Groth16" "statement": "Access limited to KYC scope" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_TENANT#CRYPTO:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_TENANT#CRYPTO:..." "signer": "CVID_TENANT#CRYPTO" "ts": "2025-05-15T10:30:00Z" "type": "ZK_PROOF_PUBLISH" - "payload": "dataset_commitment": "blake3:deadbeef..." "scope": "KYC" "verified": true "zk_proof_hash": "blake3:00aa11bb..." "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_AUDITOR#THIRD_PARTY:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_AUDITOR#THIRD_PARTY:..." "signer": "CVID_AUDITOR#THIRD_PARTY" "ts": "2025-05-16T11:00:00Z" "type": "AUDIT_VERIFICATION" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "summary": "Compliance was verified without exposing underlying data. Commitments and ZK proofs allow third parties to validate scope-limited access while preserving confidentiality." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Record Preservation" - "Privacy-Preserving Verification" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-PRIV" - "E-RECORD" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SELECTIVE_DISCLOSURE" "logic_profile": "privacy_audit_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002081_Rejections": "RootZero0240020810_CulturalProtocolViolation": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Unauthorized land use action" "mathematical_identity": "REQ#LAND01" "type": "Request" "description": "Rejection of action on protected territory without required cultural consultation. Validator enforced deterministic E-SOC guardrails." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_CULTURE" "vault_label": "Cultural Protocol Violation" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "action": "LandUseChange" "consultation_record": null "location": "GeographicRef:TerritoryX" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:COMPANY#BETA:..." "signer": "COMPANY#BETA" "ts": "2025-05-10T10:00:00Z" "type": "REQUEST" - "payload": "reason": "No consultation with PeopleOfRiver council" "reject_code": "E-SOC" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#CULTURE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#CULTURE:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#CULTURE" "ts": "2025-05-10T10:01:00Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "rejection_code": "REJECT#CULTURAL-VIOLATION" "summary": "Action on protected land was rejected due to missing cultural consultation, enforcing respect predicates." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Community Consultation" "policy_codes": - "E-SOC" - "E-CANON" - "E-SCOPE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SOCIETAL_GUARD" "logic_profile": "cultural_respect_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020811_PublicChannelAbuse": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Abusive submission" "mathematical_identity": "COMMENT#FAIL01" "type": "Comment" "description": "Rejection of abusive comment submitted to public channel, flagged by moderator and validated with E-ABUSE reject code." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_PUBLIC" "vault_label": "Public Channel Abuse" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "content_hash": "blake3:abuse123..." "referenced_policy": null "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PERSON#TROLL01:..." "signer": "PERSON#TROLL01" "ts": "2025-04-25T14:00:00Z" "type": "COMMENT_SUBMIT" - "payload": "channel_id": "PUB-CHAN-001" "decision": "rejected" "reason": "Abusive language detected" "reject_code": "E-ABUSE" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:MODERATOR#TEAM1:..." - "sig:dilithium3:MODERATOR#TEAM1:..." "signer": "MODERATOR#TEAM1" "ts": "2025-04-25T14:01:00Z" "type": "MODERATION_DECISION" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "rejection_code": "REJECT#PUBLIC-ABUSE" "summary": "Abusive public channel comment was rejected and logged with deterministic moderation enforcement." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Moderation Policy" "policy_codes": - "E-SOC" - "E-CANON" - "E-ABUSE" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "TRANSPARENT_MODERATION" "logic_profile": "public_feedback_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020812_PrivacyBreachAttempt": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Raw dataset disclosure" "mathematical_identity": "DATA#FAIL01" "type": "DataDisclosure" "description": "Rejection of audit attempt where validator required ZK proof but tenant disclosed raw personal data, violating privacy policy." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_TENANT" "vault_label": "Privacy Breach Attempt" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "dataset": "raw-personal-data" "zk_proof": null "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_TENANT#CUSTODIAN:..." "signer": "CVID_TENANT#CUSTODIAN" "ts": "2025-05-18T09:00:00Z" "type": "DATA_SUBMIT" - "payload": "details": "Raw personal data disclosure prohibited" "reason": "Missing zero-knowledge proof" "reject_code": "E-PRIV" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_AUDITOR#THIRD_PARTY:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_AUDITOR#THIRD_PARTY:..." "signer": "CVID_AUDITOR#THIRD_PARTY" "ts": "2025-05-18T09:01:00Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "governance" "rejection_code": "REJECT#PRIVACY-BREACH" "summary": "Disclosure was rejected because tenant exposed raw data instead of required ZK proof. Privacy enforcement upheld by validator." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify ZK Proof" "policy_codes": - "E-PRIV" - "E-CANON" - "E-RECORD" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "SELECTIVE_DISCLOSURE" "logic_profile": "privacy_audit_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400209_SecurityThreats": "RootZero024002090_Acceptance": "RootZero0240020900_SecurityCommitmentProof": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Regular proof of security commitment" "mathematical_identity": "ATTEST#SECURE01" "type": "Attestation" "description": "Demonstrates proof of proactive security commitment through validator enforcement of periodic attestations." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_SECURITY" "vault_label": "Security Commitment Attestation" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "policy": "Quarterly security attestations" "scope": "Global operations" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ORG#ALPHA:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ORG#ALPHA:..." "signer": "ORG#ALPHA" "ts": "2025-05-01T08:00:00Z" "type": "ATTEST_COMMITMENT" - "payload": "reason": "Security attestation accepted" "reject_code": "E-AUTH" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#SECURITY:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#SECURITY:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#SECURITY" "ts": "2025-05-01T08:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "summary": "ORG#ALPHA demonstrated valid quarterly security attestation. Validator enforced proactive trust commitment." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Authority & Delegation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-AUTH" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "PERIODIC_ATTESTATION" "logic_profile": "security_commitment_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020901_ClimateRiskPreparedness": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Climate risk disclosure attested" "mathematical_identity": "DISCLOSURE#CLIMATE01" "type": "Disclosure" "description": "Demonstrates validator recognition of proactive climate risk disclosure and preparedness logging." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_CLIMATE" "vault_label": "Climate Risk Preparedness" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "mitigation_plan": "Data center floodproofing" "risk_level": "MEDIUM" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ORG#BETA:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ORG#BETA:..." "signer": "ORG#BETA" "ts": "2025-05-15T09:00:00Z" "type": "CLIMATE_DISCLOSURE" - "payload": "reason": "Climate disclosure accepted" "reject_code": "E-RISK" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#CLIMATE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#CLIMATE:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#CLIMATE" "ts": "2025-05-15T09:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "summary": "ORG#BETA disclosed and logged its climate risk plan. Validator enforced preparedness transparency." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Threat Detection" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-RISK" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "RISK_DISCLOSURE" "logic_profile": "climate_risk_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020902_SignatureVerificationSuccess": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Verified dual-signed deed transfer" "mathematical_identity": "TX#SIG_OK" "type": "Transaction" "description": "Demonstrates successful multi-signature verification under dual (Ed25519 + Dilithium3) enforcement, preserving canonical trust." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_VALIDATOR" "vault_label": "Signature Verification Success" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#OK01" "transfer_to": "OWNER#BETA" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:OWNER#ALPHA:..." - "sig:dilithium3:OWNER#ALPHA:..." "signer": "OWNER#ALPHA" "ts": "2025-06-01T08:00:00Z" "type": "DEED_TRANSFER" - "payload": "reason": "Signatures verified successfully" "reject_code": "E-SIG" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#CRYPTO:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#CRYPTO:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#CRYPTO" "ts": "2025-06-01T08:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "summary": "Deed transfer validated successfully with dual PQC signatures, ensuring resilience against signature forgery." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-SIG" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DUAL_SIGNATURE" "logic_profile": "sig_verification_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020903_AccessControlEnforcement": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Authorized user accessing restricted system" "mathematical_identity": "ACCESS#123" "type": "AccessRequest" "description": "Demonstrates validator enforcement of access control boundaries, rejecting unauthorized actors while allowing authorized actions." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_ACCESS" "vault_label": "Access Control Enforcement" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "action": "VIEW_PAYSLIP" "role": "HR_MANAGER" "system": "SYSTEM#PAYROLL" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:USER#AUTHORIZED:..." "signer": "USER#AUTHORIZED" "ts": "2025-06-05T09:00:00Z" "type": "ACCESS_REQUEST" - "payload": "reason": "Authorized role validated" "reject_code": "E-AUTH" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#ACCESS:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#ACCESS:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#ACCESS" "ts": "2025-06-05T09:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "summary": "Access was granted correctly for an HR_MANAGER role. Validator confirmed authority and scope, preserving access integrity." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Authority & Delegation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-AUTH" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "ROLE_BASED_ACCESS" "logic_profile": "access_control_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020904_DataIntegrityPreserved": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Payroll data with hash continuity verified" "mathematical_identity": "FLOW#HASH_OK" "type": "DataFlow" "description": "Demonstrates validator confirmation of hash-matched data transfer, ensuring end-to-end integrity of sensitive records." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_DATA" "vault_label": "Data Integrity Preserved" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "declared_hash": "blake3:aa11bb22" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HR_SYSTEM:..." "signer": "HR_SYSTEM" "ts": "2025-06-10T10:00:00Z" "type": "DATA_TRANSFER" - "payload": "received_hash": "blake3:aa11bb22" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PAYROLL_SYSTEM:..." "signer": "PAYROLL_SYSTEM" "ts": "2025-06-10T10:00:01Z" "type": "DATA_RECEIPT" - "payload": "reason": "Hash continuity confirmed" "reject_code": "E-CHAIN" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#DATA:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#DATA:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#DATA" "ts": "2025-06-10T10:00:02Z" "type": "VALIDATION_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "summary": "HR to Payroll data flow preserved cryptographic hash continuity, validator confirmed no tampering occurred." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "HASH_VERIFICATION" "logic_profile": "data_integrity_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002091_Rejections": "RootZero0240020910_SignatureForgeryAttempt": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Forged deed transfer" "mathematical_identity": "TX#FORGE01" "type": "Transaction" "description": "Rejection of forged signature attempt using invalid Ed25519 key, validator enforced E-SIG boundary." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_VALIDATOR" "vault_label": "Signature Forgery Attempt" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "deed": "DEED#BAD01" "transfer_to": "OWNER#VICTIM" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:OWNER#FAKE_INVALID:..." "signer": "OWNER#FAKE" "ts": "2025-06-12T11:00:00Z" "type": "DEED_TRANSFER" - "payload": "reason": "Invalid or forged signature" "reject_code": "E-SIG" "validator_error": "ERR_INVALID_SIGNATURE" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#CRYPTO:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#CRYPTO:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#CRYPTO" "ts": "2025-06-12T11:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "rejection_code": "REJECT#SIGNATURE-FORGERY" "summary": "Forged signature detected and rejected. Validator enforced canonical cryptographic boundary." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Signatures" "policy_codes": - "E-SIG" - "E-CANON" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "DUAL_SIGNATURE" "logic_profile": "sig_verification_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020911_UnauthorizedAccessAttempt": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Unauthorized access" "mathematical_identity": "ACCESS#FAIL01" "type": "AccessRequest" "description": "Rejection of unauthorized system access request where user lacked the required role." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_ACCESS" "vault_label": "Unauthorized Access Attempt" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "action": "VIEW_PAYSLIP" "role": "NONE" "system": "SYSTEM#PAYROLL" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:USER#INTRUDER:..." "signer": "USER#INTRUDER" "ts": "2025-06-15T13:00:00Z" "type": "ACCESS_REQUEST" - "payload": "reason": "Unauthorized access attempt" "reject_code": "E-AUTH" "validator_error": "ERR_POLICY_CONFLICT" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#ACCESS:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#ACCESS:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#ACCESS" "ts": "2025-06-15T13:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "rejection_code": "REJECT#ACCESS-UNAUTHORIZED" "summary": "Unauthorized access attempt blocked. Validator preserved role-based enforcement boundary." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Access Policy" "policy_codes": - "E-AUTH" - "E-CANON" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "ROLE_BASED_ACCESS" "logic_profile": "access_control_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240020912_DataTamperDetected": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Payroll data tampered" "mathematical_identity": "FLOW#HASH_FAIL" "type": "DataFlow" "description": "Rejection of data transfer where declared and received hashes did not match, indicating tampering." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_DATA" "vault_label": "Data Tamper Detected" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "declared_hash": "blake3:aa11bb22" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:HR_SYSTEM:..." "signer": "HR_SYSTEM" "ts": "2025-06-20T15:00:00Z" "type": "DATA_TRANSFER" - "payload": "received_hash": "blake3:ff99ee00" "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:PAYROLL_SYSTEM:..." "signer": "PAYROLL_SYSTEM" "ts": "2025-06-20T15:00:01Z" "type": "DATA_RECEIPT" - "payload": "reason": "Hash mismatch detected" "reject_code": "E-CHAIN" "validator_error": "ERR_DATA_TAMPER" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#DATA:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#DATA:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#DATA" "ts": "2025-06-20T15:00:02Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "security" "rejection_code": "REJECT#DATA-TAMPER" "summary": "Hash mismatch revealed tampering in payroll transfer. Validator rejected the flow to preserve integrity." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Verify Continuity" "policy_codes": - "E-CHAIN" - "E-CANON" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "HASH_VERIFICATION" "logic_profile": "data_integrity_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero02400210_EnterpriseOpsVersioning": "RootZero024002100_Acceptance": "RootZero0240021000_EnterpriseVaultDemo": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Enterprise multi-subsidiary vault" "mathematical_identity": "ENT_VAULT#001" "type": "Vault" "description": "Demonstrates full enterprise vault lifecycle with issuance, upgrade, and transfer in a corporate setting." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "CORPORATE" "registrar": "CVID_ENTERPRISE" "vault_label": "Enterprise Vault" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "subsidiaries": - "SUB_A" - "SUB_B" "vault_id": "ENT_VAULT#001" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ENT_CORP:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ENT_CORP:..." "signer": "ENT_CORP" "ts": "2025-04-01T09:00:00Z" "type": "VAULT_CREATION" "lifecycle_stage": "enterprise_ops" "summary": "Enterprise vault ENT_VAULT#001 issued with governance and multi-subsidiary structure." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" - "Record Preservation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "ENTERPRISE_GOVERNANCE" "logic_profile": "enterprise_vault_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240021001_LeasingAndRenewalWithAITraining": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "AI lease subject to renewal via retraining" "mathematical_identity": "LEASE#AI_2025" "type": "Lease" "description": "Demonstrates leasing cycle enforcement with renewal tied to AI model retraining obligations." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_ENTERPRISE" "vault_label": "Leasing Renewal AI Training" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "lease_id": "LEASE#AI_2025" "retraining_required": true "term": "1 year" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ENT_CORP:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ENT_CORP:..." "signer": "ENT_CORP" "ts": "2025-05-10T08:00:00Z" "type": "LEASE_ISSUE" - "payload": "lease_id": "LEASE#AI_2025" "retraining_proof": "completed" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ENT_CORP:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ENT_CORP:..." "signer": "ENT_CORP" "ts": "2026-05-10T08:00:00Z" "type": "LEASE_RENEWAL" "lifecycle_stage": "enterprise_ops" "summary": "Lease renewed successfully with AI retraining proof, ensuring operational compliance." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" - "Record Preservation" - "AI Retraining Validation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" - "E-TRAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "RENEWAL_TIED_TO_TRAINING" "logic_profile": "lease_ai_training_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240021002_EnterpriseVersioningAndContinuousRetraining": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Corporate AI system with versioned models" "mathematical_identity": "ENT_AI#2025" "type": "EnterpriseAI" "description": "Demonstrates version-controlled enterprise vault with continuous retraining of AI models embedded in corporate logic." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_ENTERPRISE" "vault_label": "Enterprise Versioning Continuous Retraining" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "model_version": "v1.0" "retraining_required": true "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ENT_CORP:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ENT_CORP:..." "signer": "ENT_CORP" "ts": "2025-06-01T09:00:00Z" "type": "AI_MODEL_DEPLOY" - "payload": "model_version": "v1.1" "retraining": "complete" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:ENT_CORP:..." - "sig:dilithium3:ENT_CORP:..." "signer": "ENT_CORP" "ts": "2025-06-15T09:00:00Z" "type": "AI_MODEL_RETRAIN" "lifecycle_stage": "enterprise_ops" "summary": "ENT_AI#2025 continuously retrained and versioned, ensuring enterprise compliance and operational integrity." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" - "AI Retraining Validation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" - "E-TRAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "CONTINUOUS_RETRAINING" "logic_profile": "enterprise_versioning_v1" "validator_required": true "RootZero0240021003_Upgrade_Lineage_Preservation_Enterprise": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Identifier migrating to upgraded logic" "mathematical_identity": "ORG1" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates enforcement of upgrade continuity, preserving lineage when Deeds migrate to upgraded logic profiles." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_UPGRADE_AUTHORITY" "vault_label": "Upgrade Lineage Preservation" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "from_logic": "upgrade_lineage_v1" "id": "ORG1" "to_logic": "upgrade_lineage_v2" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:Custodian#UPGRADE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:Custodian#UPGRADE:..." "signer": "Custodian#UPGRADE" "ts": "2025-09-30T11:00:00Z" "type": "UPGRADE_REQUEST" - "payload": "enforcement_proof": "Rule: All upgrades must preserve ancestry and hash chain.\nORG1 migration accepted with preserved lineage.\n" "reason": "Upgrade lineage preserved" "reject_code": "E-CHAIN" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#UPGRADE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#UPGRADE:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#UPGRADE" "ts": "2025-09-30T11:00:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_ENFORCEMENT" "lifecycle_stage": "enterprise_ops" "summary": "ORG1 was upgraded from v1 to v2 with preserved lineage. Validators enforced continuity, preventing ancestry loss." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" - "Record Preservation" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "UPGRADE_CONTINUITY" "logic_profile": "upgrade_lineage_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero024002101_Rejections": "RootZero0240021010_Upgrade_Lineage_Mismatch_Reject": "custody": "digital_assets": - "description": "Identifier attempting invalid upgrade" "mathematical_identity": "ORG2" "type": "Deed" "description": "Demonstrates rejection of a Deed upgrade when lineage hash continuity is broken." "identity": "jurisdiction_primary": "GLOBAL" "registrar": "CVID_UPGRADE_AUTHORITY" "vault_label": "Upgrade Lineage Mismatch" "journal": "entries": - "payload": "from_logic": "upgrade_lineage_v1" "id": "ORG2" "lineage_hash": "tampered" "to_logic": "upgrade_lineage_v2" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:Custodian#UPGRADE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:Custodian#UPGRADE:..." "signer": "Custodian#UPGRADE" "ts": "2025-09-30T11:10:00Z" "type": "UPGRADE_REQUEST" - "payload": "reason": "Lineage hash continuity broken" "reject_code": "E-CHAIN" "validator_error": "ERR_DATA_TAMPER" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR#UPGRADE:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR#UPGRADE:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR#UPGRADE" "ts": "2025-09-30T11:10:01Z" "type": "VALIDATION_REJECTION" "lifecycle_stage": "negative" "summary": "Upgrade request for ORG2 rejected because lineage hash was broken. Validator preserved ancestry integrity." "validation_links": "checklist_steps_applied": - "Normalize Input" - "Verify Signatures" - "Verify Continuity" "policy_codes": - "E-CANON" - "E-CHAIN" "vault_logic": "enforcement_model": "UPGRADE_CONTINUITY" "logic_profile": "upgrade_lineage_v2" "validator_required": true "RootZero02_Journal": "RootZero0201_Description": "The Journal is the local record inside each Deed’s Vault. It is hash-linked, immutable, and forms the first entry in the double-entry system (the second being the Registry when public reporting is required). The Journal captures all actions, attestations, delegations, and continuity proofs." "RootZero0202_Semantics": "The Journal is authoritative at the Vault level. Every action must first be recorded in the Journal before it can be mirrored to the Registry (if required). This enforces local accountability and ensures every action has ancestry and cryptographic lineage." "RootZero0203_Structure": "RootZero020301_Fields": - "description": "Timestamp of the entry in ISO8601 with Zulu UTC format." "field": "ts" - "description": "Declares the action or event type (INIT, TRANSFER, SUCCESSION, VALIDATOR_CONFIRM, etc.)." "field": "type" - "description": "The CVID of the actor or validator signing the entry." "field": "signer" - "description": "Declares whether entry is ed25519-only, pqc-only, or dual. Immutable per entry." "field": "signature_policy" - "description": "Contains one or more cryptographic signatures consistent with signature_policy." "field": "signatures" - "description": "Structured object with the action details. Always canonical YAML, NFC-normalized." "field": "payload" - "description": "Continuity link to the prior JournalEntry. Must equal blake3(canonical_bytes(prior entry, sealed)), where \"sealed\" means the full canonical JournalEntry INCLUDING its signatures field(s). Any mismatch = E-CHAIN." "field": "parent_hash" "RootZero020302_EventTypes": - "INIT" - "TRANSFER" - "SUCCESSION" - "VALIDATOR_CONFIRM" - "CO_SIGN" - "SNAPSHOT" - "MIGRATION" "RootZero020303_Constraints": - "Canonicalization is mandatory before CVID derivation." - "parent_hash must link to prior entry for continuity." - "Event Type Rule: type MUST be one of RootZero020302_EventTypes. Any other value = E-TYPE." - "Hash Preimage (Chain): parent_hash MUST equal blake3(canonical_bytes(previous JournalEntry, sealed)), where \"sealed\" means the full canonical JournalEntry INCLUDING its signatures field(s). Any mismatch = E-CHAIN." - "Hash String Format (Chain): parent_hash MUST be encoded as \"blake3:<HEX_LOWER_64>\" where <HEX_LOWER_64> matches [0-9a-f]{64} exactly (64 lowercase hex chars). The \"blake3:\" prefix is mandatory. Any deviation = E-HASH-FORMAT." - "Signature Preimage: signatures MUST verify over canonical_bytes(JournalEntryCore), where JournalEntryCore is the canonical JournalEntry containing ALL fields EXCEPT signatures (including parent_hash). In dual mode, both signatures MUST be present or reject = E-SIG-POLICY." - "Signature must match declared signature_policy; omission in dual = rejection." - "No discretionary edits permitted after sealing." "RootZero0204_SampleEntries": - "parent_hash": null "payload": "note": "First entry initializing the Journal." "signature_policy": "ed25519-only" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_INIT_DEMO:..." "signer": "CVID_INIT_DEMO" "ts": "2025-01-01T09:00:00Z" "type": "INIT" - "parent_hash": "blake3:<HEX_LOWER_64_OF_SEALED_PRIOR_ENTRY>" "payload": "asset": "DEMO_TOKEN" "from": "CVID_INIT_DEMO" "quantity": 100 "to": "CVID_ACTOR_001" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_ACTOR_001:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_ACTOR_001:..." "signer": "CVID_ACTOR_001" "ts": "2025-01-01T09:15:00Z" "type": "TRANSFER" - "parent_hash": "blake3:<HEX_LOWER_64_OF_SEALED_PRIOR_ENTRY>" "payload": "note": "Verified continuity and signature integrity." "result": "PASS" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_VALIDATOR_001:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_VALIDATOR_001:..." "signer": "CVID_VALIDATOR_001" "ts": "2025-01-01T09:30:00Z" "type": "VALIDATOR_CONFIRM" "RootZero03_PublicAccountingRegistry": "RootZero0301_Description": "The Registry is the public counterpart to the Journal. It records reportable actions (such as issuance, royalties, or succession) in a global, validator-co-signed ledger. The Registry enforces transparency, synchronizes across jurisdictions, and provides continuity proof to courts and sovereigns." "RootZero0302_Semantics": "The Registry does not replace the Journal. Instead, it complements it via ADES-based double-entry logic: every public action must have both a Journal entry (local Dr/Cr) and a Registry entry (global Cr/Dr). Together they guarantee mirrored accountability." "RootZero0303_Structure": "RootZero030301_Fields": - "description": "Timestamp of entry (ISO8601, UTC)." "field": "ts" - "description": "Action/event type mirrored from Journal." "field": "type" - "description": "Registry CVID of validator/registrar." "field": "signer" - "description": "ed25519-only, pqc-only, or dual." "field": "signature_policy" - "description": "One or more cryptographic proofs, consistent with declared policy." "field": "signatures" - "description": "Structured details consistent with Journal entry, canonicalized. Must include journal_ref and hash." "field": "payload" "RootZero0304_Rules": - "SampleEntries are NON-NORMATIVE examples only. Validators MUST NOT interpret SampleEntries as live ledger state." - "No Registry entry may exist without a corresponding Journal entry." - "Registry MUST reference the corresponding Journal entry via payload.journal_ref." - "Registry Payload Requirement: payload.journal_ref is REQUIRED and payload.hash is REQUIRED. Missing required fields = E-REG-PAYLOAD-MISSING." - "Journal Ref Grammar: payload.journal_ref MUST match \"<CVID>#<SEQ4>\" where <SEQ4> is a 4-digit zero-padded decimal (0001-9999) and <CVID> matches the CVID grammar. Any deviation = E-JREF-FORMAT." - "Hash String Format: payload.hash MUST be encoded as \"blake3:<HEX_LOWER_64>\" where <HEX_LOWER_64> matches [0-9a-f]{64} exactly (64 lowercase hex chars). The \"blake3:\" prefix is mandatory. Any deviation = E-HASH-FORMAT." - "Hash Meaning Rule: payload.hash MUST equal blake3(canonical_bytes(referenced JournalEntry, sealed)), where \"sealed\" means the full canonical JournalEntry INCLUDING its signatures field(s). Any mismatch = rejection." - "Registry Type Semantics: Registry.type is a Registry-layer classifier and MAY differ from the referenced JournalEntry.type. Registry.type MUST be ALLCAPS with underscores only, matching [A-Z][A-Z0-9_]{2,63}. Any deviation = E-TYPE." - "Dual signatures required where declared; omission = rejection." - "Registry is public and immutable once sealed." "RootZero0305_SampleEntries": - "payload": "deed_id": "D0001" "hash": "blake3:<HEX_LOWER_64>" "journal_ref": "CVID_INIT_DEMO#0001" "jurisdiction": "GLOBAL" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_REGISTRAR_GLOBAL:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_REGISTRAR_GLOBAL:..." "signer": "CVID_REGISTRAR_GLOBAL" "ts": "2025-01-01T09:20:00Z" "type": "DEED_REGISTRATION" - "payload": "hash": "blake3:<HEX_LOWER_64>" "heirs": - "CVID_HEIR_001" - "CVID_HEIR_002" "journal_ref": "CVID_ACTOR_001#0005" "succession_event": "EXECUTOR_CONFIRMED" "signature_policy": "dual" "signatures": - "sig:ed25519:CVID_REGISTRAR_GLOBAL:..." - "sig:dilithium3:CVID_REGISTRAR_GLOBAL:..." "signer": "CVID_REGISTRAR_GLOBAL" "ts": "2025-01-01T09:35:00Z" "type": "SUCCESSION_RECORD" "class": "Trunk" "codepoint": "U+0000" "coordinate": 0 "id": "RootZero" "issuance_timestamp": "1970-01-01T00:00:00Z" "issued_by": "RootZero" "owner_pubkey": "ed25519:pub:rootzero" "signature_algorithms": - "ed25519" - "dilithium3" "signature_policy": "dual" "unicode_name": "NULL" "vault_logic_ref": "RootZero0180_VaultLogicAndInfrastructure"