feat: price med-arb by phase, attest the conflicts undertaking, and answer the first real spam
Build and deploy / build-and-deploy (push) Failing after 4s

Pouya's rulings of 2026-09-03 (the last two D20 findings) and 2026-09-04 (the
spam observation and four mitigations), in one change set.

D20 finding 10 — med-arb is billed BY PHASE, each phase at the rates already
published, so /fees/'s "Every figure is on this page" is true as written rather
than narrowed. FEES.medArb is the single source; docs/07 §Med-arb carries the
rule INTERIM against R5, and R5 now carries it back, because a derived price
moves silently when a rate moves.

D20 finding 13 — conduct undertaking (g), attested 2026-09-03, published as his
wording verbatim on /legal/privacy/ and /contact/. The clause that raised the
finding promised to DISCLOSE a conflicts check's outcome, which the attestation
does not cover; it is struck. D20 now partitions 17 fixed / 2 refuted / 1 owed.

Spam, 2026-09-04 — recorded in docs/05 §Observed abuse with the date and
signature. A second honeypot (a decoy checkbox, own class, `hidden`, a label
that tells a human not to tick it) and scoring that LABELS and never rejects:
nothing is dropped, nothing new is stored, and only the operator notification
changes. Q65 opens the WAF cost call.

The timing floor could not be built: there is no timing check and never has
been. docs/05 carries it struck, and every mechanism that would give a real
per-visitor clock breaks zero-JS, handler-and-form-only, or D1. Q66.

configure.mjs gains section 5 — a custom origin request policy forwarding
CloudFront-Viewer-Address on /api/*. Written, dry-run against the live
distribution, NOT applied. It reads the handler's own header reads and refuses
to run if the whitelist omits one.

And reading the live account to do it found four AGENTS.md §7 rows saying the
intake backend was undeployed, two days after it went live — corrected against
get-function-configuration, get-routes, get-stage, get-policy and the deployed
zip, which was downloaded and read.

Review: adversarial-reviewer only (claims-auditor is D20's cutover pass and has
run). Round 1 five lenses, 56 findings, 7 blocking, 4 refuted by an independent
refuter; round 2 four lenses, 36 findings, 33 of them defects in round 1's own
repairs. Stopped at two per D19.

Gates, exit status read for each: check 0 · build 0 (23 pages) · check:claims 0
· check:intake 0 · og:proof 0 · lint 0 · spam-score.test 39/39 with 6/6 mutations
killed · router.test 30/30 · minifier grep 1 (clean) · lighthouse 0, no category
below 95 · configure.mjs dry run 0, nothing written.

Nothing deployed and nothing applied.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Md3GndFqWPzK78xAoebsg5
This commit is contained in:
Pouya Lajevardi
2026-09-04 10:06:37 -04:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 5
parent 02739adac9
commit 3c3ba5dc6e
21 changed files with 2443 additions and 141 deletions
+64 -7
View File
@@ -38,15 +38,21 @@
*/
import BaseLayout from '../layouts/BaseLayout.astro';
import Button from '../components/Button.astro';
import Undertaking from '../components/Undertaking.astro';
import ContactBand from '../components/ContactBand.astro';
import Eyebrow from '../components/Eyebrow.astro';
import SectionHeading from '../components/SectionHeading.astro';
import { getImage } from 'astro:assets';
import ogDefault from '../assets/og-portrait.jpg';
import { pageGraph } from '../data/schema';
import { CONTACT, NO_RETAINER_NOTICE } from '../data/site';
import {
CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS,
CONTACT,
NO_RETAINER_NOTICE,
} from '../data/site';
import {
CONSENT_TEXT,
DECOY_CHECKBOX_FIELD,
HONEYPOT_FIELD,
INTAKE_ACTION,
INTAKE_FIELDS,
@@ -117,11 +123,20 @@ const hintId = (name: string) => `${name}-hint`;
</div>
<div class="prose">
<p class="statement">{NO_RETAINER_NOTICE}</p>
<p>I ask for the other parties and their counsel for one reason.</p>
{
/* RENDERED FROM `CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS`, NEVER TYPED — undertaking (g).
⚠️ THIS PAGE HAND-TYPED THE SAME PROPOSITION AS *"I cannot accept an
appointment before conflicts are checked"* UNTIL 2026-09-04, and it
survived the change set that struck the identical sentence from
`/legal/privacy/` — one file swept, its sibling missed, which is the
shape R8 exists for. §4 row (g) lists BOTH surfaces. */
}
<Undertaking>{CONDUCT_UNDERTAKINGS.conflictsCheck}</Undertaking>
<p>
I ask for the other parties and their counsel because I cannot accept
an appointment before conflicts are checked, and that check needs
names. Please keep the summary short and leave privileged or
confidential detail out of it — the call is for that.
That check needs names, and the call above is where it happens. Please
keep the summary short and leave privileged or confidential detail out
of it — the call is for that.
</p>
<p>
What is collected, where it is stored, how long it is kept, and how to
@@ -248,7 +263,13 @@ const hintId = (name: string) => `${name}-hint`;
the form: a browser that helpfully fills a plausible-looking field
would make a human look like a bot. */
}
<div class="honeypot" aria-hidden="true">
{
/* `hidden` ADDED 2026-09-04, for the reason spelled out on the decoy
below: a class-only rule leaves this field on screen wherever author
styles do not apply, and a visitor who fills it loses their inquiry
behind a success page. */
}
<div class="honeypot" hidden aria-hidden="true">
<label for={HONEYPOT_FIELD}>Company website</label>
<input
type="text"
@@ -287,6 +308,41 @@ const hintId = (name: string) => `${name}-hint`;
</p>
</div>
{
/* THE SECOND HONEYPOT — a decoy CHECKBOX. The mechanism, and the
limits of what the observed spam supports, are in `src/data/intake.ts`
and are not restated here. Four properties of the MARKUP, each of
which is what stops this field costing a real inquiry:
· its own CLASS NAME, not `.honeypot` — one selector must not
match both traps. They share a declaration block below, which is
presentation; what matters is that `.honeypot` does not select
this one;
· placed after the consent block, not beside the other honeypot;
· `hidden` as well as the CSS rule, so it stays hidden where
author styles do not apply;
· a label that tells a human not to tick it. With `hidden` in
place a human essentially cannot see it, so this is the last
line rather than the first — and it costs almost nothing,
because the PLAUSIBLE NAME is what a bot matches on and the name
is unchanged.
⚠️ NO `required`, AND NO `checked`. An unchecked box sends nothing,
so absence is the pass — and the handler tests for a NON-EMPTY value,
so an empty one passes too. */
}
<div class="optin-decoy" hidden aria-hidden="true">
<label for={DECOY_CHECKBOX_FIELD}>Leave this box unticked.</label>
<input
type="checkbox"
id={DECOY_CHECKBOX_FIELD}
name={DECOY_CHECKBOX_FIELD}
value="on"
tabindex="-1"
autocomplete="off"
/>
</div>
{
/* ⚠️ `<Button type="submit">`, NOT a hand-written `<button class="btn">`.
`.btn` and `.btn-primary` are SCOPED TO `Button.astro`, so a raw
@@ -505,7 +561,8 @@ const hintId = (name: string) => `${name}-hint`;
the input are belt and braces for the case where a future stylesheet
un-hides it. Do not swap this for `visibility` or an off-screen position:
an off-screen input is still focusable and still announced. */
.honeypot {
.honeypot,
.optin-decoy {
display: none;
}