Sample brief · Q2 · walkthrough-halyard-v1
How has the report worker’s documented access changed over time?
Subject: Halyard Example Co. (fictional). This page shows the shape of a brief. It is not a product output, and its conclusions are about fictional systems.
Current interpretation
No single conclusion. This question asks for a history, so the brief lists claims in order with their sources.
Claims and evidence
The report worker consumes jobs from the exports queue and the audit queue.
Stale assertion · superseded by Architecture overview v3
Supporting evidence
-
The report worker consumes jobs from the exports queue and the audit queue.
Conflicting or superseding evidence
-
The report worker runs as svc-report-worker. It reads only from the billing-exports queue and has no access to the customer-records store.
v3 replaces this description and names only billing-exports.
The report worker reads only from billing-exports and has no access to customer-records.
Contradicted for the 2026-04-15 capture
Supporting evidence
-
The report worker runs as svc-report-worker. It reads only from the billing-exports queue and has no access to the customer-records store.
Conflicting or superseding evidence
-
{ "Sid": "TemporaryBackfill", "Effect": "Allow", "Action": "store:Read", "Resource": "store/customer-records/*", "Condition": { "DateLessThan": { "now": "2026-06-30T00:00:00Z" } } }
Policy revision 17 still allowed reads on customer-records until 2026-06-30, after the architecture document was published.
What remains uncertain
The document states an intended boundary. The captured policy shows an exception that the document does not mention.
Policy revision 17 lets svc-report-worker read customer-records/* until 2026-06-30.
Extracted from configuration
Supporting evidence
-
{ "Sid": "TemporaryBackfill", "Effect": "Allow", "Action": "store:Read", "Resource": "store/customer-records/*", "Condition": { "DateLessThan": { "now": "2026-06-30T00:00:00Z" } } }
Conflicting or superseding evidence
-
The report worker runs as svc-report-worker. It reads only from the billing-exports queue and has no access to the customer-records store.
The architecture overview says there is no access to customer-records.
What remains uncertain
The policy shows what was permitted, not whether the permission was used or whether revision 17 was the deployed revision.
CHG-0142 removed the TemporaryBackfill statement; revision 18 contains only ReadBillingExports.
Stated, not independently observed
Supporting evidence
-
Removed the TemporaryBackfill statement from the svc-report-worker policy after the backfill completed. Policy revision 18 contains only ReadBillingExports.
What remains uncertain
Policy revision 18 is not in this corpus, so the removal is reported by the change record but not observed in configuration.
Open items and limitations
- CL-1: The document states an intended boundary. The captured policy shows an exception that the document does not mention.
- CL-2: The policy shows what was permitted, not whether the permission was used or whether revision 17 was the deployed revision.
- CL-3: Policy revision 18 is not in this corpus, so the removal is reported by the change record but not observed in configuration.
- Every source here is a document or record. A citation shows that a source says something, not that it is true.
- This sample is not a security assessment or certification of any system.
Sources
| ID | Source | Version | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| SRC-1 | Architecture overview https://docs.halyard.example.invalid/architecture/v2 | v2 | 2025-11-20 |
| SRC-2 | Architecture overview https://docs.halyard.example.invalid/architecture/v3 | v3 | 2026-03-02 |
| SRC-3 | Access policy: svc-report-worker https://config.halyard.example.invalid/policies/svc-report-worker@17 | revision 17 | 2026-04-15 |
| SRC-4 | Change record CHG-0142 https://changes.halyard.example.invalid/CHG-0142 | final | 2026-07-08 |