Files
archy/docs
archipelagoandClaude Opus 5 db60c3382d docs(marketplace-protocol): the DID signature layer is specified but not implemented
This doc is marked "Status: implemented ... shipped end-to-end" and then
describes a cryptographic verification chain that does not exist. On a repo
about to go public, that is the single worst kind of doc bug: it promises a
security property.

`signatures.manifest_hash` / `signatures.did_signature` appear exactly once in
the codebase — as two struct fields at `marketplace.rs:106-107`. Nothing reads
them. There is no hash comparison, no DID resolution, no signature check. The
authenticity actually delivered is the Nostr event's own NIP-01 Schnorr
signature, which proves the publishing key sent the event but says nothing about
the DID the manifest names.

Added a warning at the top, marked the "Manifest Signing (DID Layer)" section
and steps 3-6 of the verification flow as not implemented, and annotated steps
7-8 as advisory (validate_manifest returns scoring issues; it does not block
discovery or install).

The trust model was overstated in the same direction:
- "DID Verification | 30 | Manifest is signed by a valid DID key" is a
  `did.starts_with("did:")` string test. Any publisher can claim any DID and
  take the 30 points.
- "Relay Consensus | 20" is graduated and never zero (1 relay still scores 5).
- "Version History | 15 | multiple published versions (shows maintenance)" —
  nothing counts versions; it's 10 for a 3-part semver plus 5 for a non-empty
  repo_url.
Worked the arithmetic through: an unsigned manifest with a plausible DID string
and a pinned image scores 65, landing in the "Community" tier. Said so.

Other corrections:
- `marketplace.unpublish` is documented but was never implemented (the string
  appears nowhere); removed it and noted why NIP-33 makes it non-trivial. Added
  the two payment methods that do exist (`create-invoice`, `check-payment`).
- The schema section said marketplace manifests "follow the existing
  apps/{app-id}/manifest.yml schema", contradicting the header three paragraphs
  above. They are separate types.
- The security-enforcement list claimed a capability allow-list, a
  host-networking ban and system-path mount restrictions. Those rules are real
  but live in the runtime manifest parser for a different schema — marketplace
  validation checks four things and gates none of them.
- `run_as_user` documented as "> 1000" in two places while the code checks
  `>= 1000` and the doc's own example uses 1000.
- Data-storage tree listed `cache/trust-scores.json` and `config.json`; neither
  is ever written.
- The 15-minute cache TTL and 30-minute background refresh don't exist —
  discovery is RPC-triggered and the cache has no expiry.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-07 20:59:45 -04:00
..

Archipelago documentation

Start here. This index groups the docs by what you're trying to do. The authoritative behaviour is always the code in core/; where a doc and the code disagree, the code wins and the doc is a bug.

Getting started

Architecture

Contributing to Archipelago itself

App development

Design docs

These record why a thing is built the way it is. They are design records, not step-by-step guides, and some predate the current implementation.

Decisions (ADRs)

There is no ADR-010 — the number was never issued, so the gap is not a missing file.

Security

Roadmap & history

  • Roadmap — where the project is going
  • archive/ — superseded design and status documents, kept for provenance