concordia-protocol

Concordia Assurance Matrix

GENERATED FILE. Source: docs/assurance.json.

Regenerate with python3 scripts/assurance/generate.py. Check committed output with python3 scripts/assurance/generate.py --check.

Current reference implementations and published conformance evidence. This registry does not change the protocol specification or runtime behavior.

The status cells are deliberately separate. Implementation is not a test, a test is not an external reproduction, and a signature is not authority, voluntariness, or justice.

Summary

Dimension Design Implementation Test Drill External reproduction Public claim
Agreement integrity specified implemented verified not verified partial bounded
Agreement authority specified partial verified not verified none bounded
Agreement voluntariness partial not implemented not verified not verified none bounded
Agreement justice partial not implemented not verified not verified none bounded
Payload confidentiality partial not implemented not verified not verified none bounded
Metadata privacy partial not implemented not verified not verified none bounded

Agreement integrity

Whether the retained bytes prove that the resolved signing keys approved the same bounded artifact and, when the closing receipt is supplied, the same transcript set.

Bounded claim: Concordia verifies signatures over canonical bytes. A countersigned receipt at concordia_attestation 0.3.0 or later binds its outcome, chain head, and message count to the parties listed in that receipt. A message chain without that closing receipt does not prove transcript-set completeness.

This does not claim: A valid signature does not establish a signer’s real-world identity, mandate, voluntariness, truthfulness, or the justice of the agreement.

Evidence

Limitations

Next proof: Obtain and register a third-party run of the receipt-set-binding profile, including splice and truncation rejection, from an implementation that shares neither Concordia code nor authorship.

Agreement authority

Whether a signer was authorized, under a configured trust policy, to make the bounded commitment represented by the artifact.

Bounded claim: Concordia can verify a signed mandate, its delegation chain, scope restrictions, time bounds, and configured revocation evidence. Authority is established only relative to the issuer keys, resolver results, context, and policy supplied to that verification.

This does not claim: A signature or agent_id alone does not prove real-world identity or authority. Concordia does not independently establish that an issuer had legal or organizational power to grant a mandate.

Evidence

Limitations

Next proof: Publish a provider-neutral authority profile with pinned issuer resolution and revocation inputs, then obtain an external implementation run over valid, over-scope, expired, rotated, and revoked mandate cases.

Agreement voluntariness

Whether participation and assent were free from coercion, hidden pressure, incapacitation, or policy-induced compulsion.

Bounded claim: Concordia can retain signed accept, reject, withdraw, approval, and denial artifacts. Those artifacts show what a signing key asserted at a boundary; they do not prove that the decision was voluntary.

This does not claim: Cryptography cannot establish freedom from duress, competence, absence of training-induced compliance, informed human consent, or authentic self-authorship.

Evidence

Limitations

Next proof: Define a voluntariness threat model and a non-overclaiming conformance profile for contested assent, revocation during negotiation, and explicit human escalation, while keeping subjective freedom outside cryptographic proof.

Agreement justice

Whether an agreement is substantively fair, non-exploitative, and compatible with the rights and welfare of affected parties.

Bounded claim: Concordia supplies structured multi-attribute offers, explicit constraints, optional resolution mechanisms, signed records, and portable evidence that a separate evaluator may use. It does not guarantee a fair or just result.

This does not claim: Pareto efficiency, mutual signatures, or protocol conformance do not prove distributive justice, equal bargaining power, absence of exploitation, or benefit to affected non-signers.

Evidence

Limitations

Next proof: Define fairness limits and evaluation fixtures that separate mechanical agreement quality from normative justice, with explicit treatment of bargaining-power asymmetry and affected non-signers.

Payload confidentiality

Whether message contents remain unreadable to relays, mailbox operators, storage services, and other transport intermediaries.

Bounded claim: Concordia messages are signed but not end-to-end encrypted. TLS can protect each network hop, while the current relay and any other intermediary carrying plaintext messages can read their contents.

This does not claim: Current Concordia deployments must not be described as end-to-end encrypted, confidential from the relay, or protected from a compromised transport operator.

Evidence

Limitations

Next proof: Complete a cross-runtime end-to-end encryption threat model and compatibility design before implementation, including key discovery, rotation, forward secrecy, multi-party sessions, recovery, and relay-visible failure behavior.

Metadata privacy

Whether protocol and transport observers are prevented from learning counterparties, timing, volume, routing, relationship, and other interaction metadata.

Bounded claim: Concordia minimizes fields in reputation attestations by excluding raw deal terms and using bounded behavioral signals, coarse categories, and value buckets. This is record-content minimization, not transport metadata privacy.

This does not claim: Concordia does not currently hide counterparties, timing, message counts, routing, access patterns, relay participation, or other traffic metadata from the systems that carry or store the interaction.

Evidence

Limitations

Next proof: Write a metadata threat model that inventories observer-visible fields and traffic patterns, then define separate content-minimization and metadata-privacy profiles with measurable leakage bounds.