GRANTHA → FORAY — Status Update — v0.1

Version. v0.1 Date. 2026-07-12 From. GRANTHA project. To. FORAY project. Carrier. Marvin Percival, DUNIN7 Operator. Status. Cross-project status report, uncommitted. Informational plus a short list of asks. Epistemic note: GRANTHA's session set is grounded in memory-reconstruction of its Discovery Record v0.12 pending a source read (Ratification Ledger §1); items below marked ratified are Operator-decided, everything else is recommended or open and labeled as such.

1. Where GRANTHA stands, in one paragraph

GRANTHA completed a major design session on 2026-07-12. The headline for FORAY: GRANTHA has dropped zero-knowledge proving entirely (ratified) and FORAY is its sole proof layer. GRANTHA is now a FORAY-anchored authorization system — grants, machine-speed reversible containment (clamp), human-gated revocation (kill), and a fast local authorizer on the access path. The session produced the grant-check seam contract, the clamp mechanics, a twice-run adversarial threat review, an anchoring decision sheet, a policy-DSL scope, and a full self-audit with remediation. The core construction is judged solid by the Operator; most parameters await ratification.

2. What this means for FORAY — the relationship, restated

• FORAY's standing is settled and clean: stateless notary — protocol + witness + anchor. Your correction of 2026-07-12 (withdrawing the FORAY-as-host hedge) was received, verified no-reliance on both sides, and closed as informational. Nothing in GRANTHA's design treats FORAY as an authorizer, a host, or an enforcement point. FORAY proves a grant changed at time T; it never decides anything.
• The ZK question is closed in both directions. Your spec's statement that ZK is "NOT a FORAY anchoring requirement" was one of the decisive inputs to GRANTHA's ZK drop. GRANTHA in turn confirms: it will hand FORAY ordinary transactions, never ZK proofs. If external cryptographic attestation is ever required by a regulator, the design is an optional layer beside GRANTHA that reads FORAY's record — FORAY's tamper-evidence is exactly what makes that possible without GRANTHA doing ZK.
• Volume expectations: GRANTHA emits on grant state-changes only — never on access checks or denials (a firm refusal, held through the session). Steady-state volume is low. The exception is containment bursts — see the open item in §5.

3. The anchoring interface, as currently designed (recommended, adoption sheet awaiting Operator ratification)

• Eight anchor-worthy events: issuance, administrative issuance, delegation, raise-pending (clamp), narrow-adjust, release, revoked, acted-on expiry. (Grew from five during the session as the clamp mechanics matured — release and narrow-adjust are state-changes and therefore emit; a pending that vanishes without an anchored release is an audit hole.)
• Schema: one Action-only FORAY transaction per event, uniform blinded envelope. On-chain content is a fixed-size commitment plus GRANTHA stream identity plus a monotonic stream_seq; nothing on-chain distinguishes an issuance from a clamp — event-kind-plus-timing is org-map material under GRANTHA's threat model. Bodies live off-chain, disclosed only inside authorized views or on dispute. stream_seq makes suppression visible as a gap (counter continuity).
• Dual cadence, recommended: a containment lane (raise-pending, revoked, release) requesting expedited/next-bundle anchoring, and a routine lane riding normal bundling. Pending anchored late is safe (reversible); revoked is final on the record only at confirmation-maturity depth per the substrate's reorg discipline.
• Mapped to FORAY v4.1.2 (read at source this session): Action-only entry point, salted identifiers, transaction_type: grant_state_change. The richer Arrangement-chained mapping was considered and rejected — reference linkage rebuilds a readable grant graph on the audit substrate.

4. Asks of FORAY

1. Bundling parameters. GRANTHA's containment-latency story and its carried-credential freshness bound are both blocked on FORAY's actual bundling cadence (the two-clocks problem: GRANTHA emission is instant-local, anchoring is bundle-windowed). Numbers or a pointer to where they'll be specified.
2. Expedited-lane feasibility. Does FORAY support (or intend) a request-expedited/next-bundle path for the containment lane, and at what cost?
3. Off-chain body availability. GRANTHA's blinded envelope depends on bodies being retrievable for authorized disclosure and dispute. This is carried on GRANTHA's records as a FORAY-side named dependency, unsolved — status?
4. Burst behavior. Under a mass-clamp event (GRANTHA's threat finding U6: a captured oversight principal clamping broadly), the containment lane sees a burst of expedited events against substrate admission ceilings. GRANTHA has recorded this interaction as un-analyzed (audit CA-13) and assigned it to the joint cadence-design pass — flagging it now so FORAY's side of that pass expects it.
5. Seqcommit access horizon. GRANTHA read seqcommit-accessor.md at source this session: script-visible seqcommit access is bounded to roughly a 12-hour finality window. GRANTHA's anchoring path may need to reference recent in-range anchors when a low-activity lane idles past that horizon between rare state-changes. Confirm whether FORAY's anchoring path already accounts for this, or whether it lands in the joint pass.
6. Routing. Whether GRANTHA's stream rides a witness-pipeline discipline (accumulate / deterministic-bundle / counter continuity) or FORAY's own bundling remains IN MOTION from the Agentic ID exchange — unchanged, listed for completeness.

5. GRANTHA-side open items FORAY should know about

• Anchoring adoption itself is recommended, not yet Operator-ratified — the sheet is cut; ratification is queued in GRANTHA's Ratification Ledger. Declining is considered near-foreclosed (it would reopen GRANTHA's settled architecture with no replacement proof layer), but FORAY should treat the interface in §3 as proposed until the sheet is signed.
• The blinded envelope and dual cadence are likewise recommended-awaiting-ratification.
• GRANTHA's Discovery Record v0.13 (which will fold in the ZK drop and amendments) is a defined work order, not yet written; a source-read of v0.12 is its precondition. Until then, GRANTHA's emission-point count and substrate figures carry a verify-on-source flag.
• Boundaries context, for awareness: the Loomworks Boundaries arc positions FORAY as "what happened," GRANTHA as "who may," Loom as "what the rules are" — with the checking machinery living at FORAY's commit path. Six open Boundaries questions are recorded GRANTHA-side (including a naming question involving the March 2026 protocol-stack conception in FORAY's own README); none block the GRANTHA↔FORAY interface above.

6. Next steps

GRANTHA's next moves are its v0.12 source read, the ratification pass, and the DSL grammar (pending an evaluator-alignment check with Boundaries). The GRANTHA↔FORAY joint item is the cadence-design pass — it needs your §4 answers (bundling parameters, expedited lane, body availability, burst behavior) and produces the containment-latency numbers both projects' guarantees quote. GRANTHA is ready for that pass as soon as FORAY's inputs exist.

DUNIN7 · GRANTHA → FORAY · cross-project status GRANTHA → FORAY — Status Update — v0.1 — 2026-07-12