From 9231a1d755e93461c05537e04f5edfb65cc627af Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jacob Hagstedt Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2026 19:51:10 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] infra README: owner decisions list after the M-1 answer (SPEC v0.20) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TQd3pEP9UeN2uifbHknQ7B --- infra/README.md | 11 ++++------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/infra/README.md b/infra/README.md index 700867c..4d6cda7 100644 --- a/infra/README.md +++ b/infra/README.md @@ -587,14 +587,11 @@ about 11 MB per response; the server allows 10 per minute per client IP. If one ### Owner decisions (open) -1. **Backup encryption (security review M-1).** The Drive backups (`kvitt-*.sqlite.gz`, `pictures-*.tar.gz`) are - not encrypted (SPEC §8.7), and `rclone.conf` holds a token with the full `drive` scope (read and write to your - whole Drive). Should the backups go through an rclone `crypt` remote (two passwords kept in `rclone.conf`, - restore through the same remote) and should rclone be re-authorised with the narrower `drive.file` scope? Both - change SPEC §8.7 and §10.9. Until you decide, the backup scripts stay as they are. -2. **Gitea token scope.** Does the workflow's tag push work with `kvitt_cicd` limited to `write:package`? If not, +Backup encryption (security review M-1) is decided: no rclone `crypt`, the `drive` scope stays (SPEC §8.7, 2026-10-19). + +1. **Gitea token scope.** Does the workflow's tag push work with `kvitt_cicd` limited to `write:package`? If not, is adding `write:repository` acceptable? -3. **Kvitt's host name (D-120).** Which name is ``? It goes into the release app and +2. **Kvitt's host name (D-120).** Which name is ``? It goes into the release app and `docs/HANDOFF.md`. ### Troubleshooting