Version. 0.1
Date. 2026-08-06
Author. Claude.ai (drafting session). Operator: Marvin Percival.
Applies to. standing-notes/loomworks-standing-note-confidentiality-posture-v0_2.md.
Produces. loomworks-standing-note-confidentiality-posture-v0_3.md. v0.2 is not edited and stands as a sibling.
Why this is a version bump and not a correction note filed beside it.
A standing note is read as current authority. That is its genre — it exists so a session can consult it and act. A correction filed in another document does not reach the session that reads this one. Every other stale-ACL document found in the record is point-in-time — a scoping note, a change request, an investigation — and a reader knows to check whether it has been superseded. A standing note carries no such signal.
And one of its three stale passages is worse than stale. Resolution 2 does not merely use the old vocabulary; it reports what the seed commits to. Seed v0.13 no longer commits to that. A note asserting another document's position, where that document has abandoned it, is wrong about a fact rather than out of date in its wording.
Replace:
**Version.** 0.2
**Date.** 2026-06-13
With:
**Version.** 0.3
**Date.** 2026-08-06
And insert, immediately after the existing Amendment note (v0.2). paragraph:
> Amendment note (v0.3). Corrects three passages that named OVA as the access-control seat and an access-control list as the restricting mechanism. Architecture Decision J1 (June 2026) placed GRANTHA there — grant as the sole primitive, no access-control list, no group object, holder-set never readable — with OVA beneath it for blind verification. Seed v0.13 (2026-08-06) absorbed that; this note had not. One of the three is a report of what the seed commits to, so it was not merely stale vocabulary but a false statement about another document. Nothing about the confidentiality property itself changes — the posture axis remains orthogonal to the access axis, which is the resolution that matters here and which holds under either mechanism. The v0.2 body is otherwise preserved.
Replace:
> The seed already has a who-can-reach axis: a scope's Memory is open / restricted (via OVA access-control list) / private, with defaults per scope kind.
With:
> The seed already has a who-can-reach axis: a scope's Memory is open / restricted (placed under grant, with GRANTHA governing reach) / private, with defaults per scope kind.
> The prior position, preserved: v0.2 and earlier described the restricted mode as an access-control list established through OVA, which is what seed v0.12 committed to. Decision J1 replaced that seat, and seed v0.13 absorbed the replacement. The substitution is not a rename — GRANTHA has no access-control list and no group object at all, where the prior model's restricting act was the establishing of a list.
[EXECUTING SESSION: the orthogonality claim in the sentences following this one is unaffected and must not be altered. Access control is not encryption under either mechanism, which is the whole of Resolution 2's point.]
Replace:
> the thing FORAY attests against and OVA authorizes against
With:
> the thing FORAY attests against and GRANTHA authorizes against
And replace:
> the UUID must remain the stable spine FORAY and OVA bind against
With:
> the UUID must remain the stable spine FORAY and GRANTHA bind against, and that OVA verifies against blindly beneath GRANTHA
Replace:
> a single per-engagement visibility column exists for dashboard filtering, with no OVA/ACL enforcement
With:
> a single per-engagement visibility column exists for dashboard filtering, with no grant enforcement of any kind
loomworks-standing-note-confidentiality-posture-v0_2.md is unmodified.DUNIN7 — Done In Seven LLC — Miami, Florida Loomworks confidentiality-posture standing note v0.2 → v0.3 — amendment instructions — v0.1 — 2026-08-06 A standing note is read as current. A correction filed elsewhere does not reach the reader.