Skip to content

feat(reconciliation): rebuild SOXL non-live static envelope from fresh main - #370

Closed
Pigbibi wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
codex/p4-ibkr-soxl-envelope-fresh-base-reslice-20260804
Closed

feat(reconciliation): rebuild SOXL non-live static envelope from fresh main#370
Pigbibi wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
codex/p4-ibkr-soxl-envelope-fresh-base-reslice-20260804

Conversation

@Pigbibi

@Pigbibi Pigbibi commented Aug 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Scope

Fresh-main reslice of the closed #369 two-file non-live evidence contract after the exact QPK pin merge/deployment completed.

  • fixed strategy_profile=soxl_soxx_trend_income
  • fixed evidence_scope=NON_LIVE_STATIC
  • fail-closed reconciliation.status=MISSING
  • learning_only=true, promotion_eligible=false, live_ready=false, size_zero_required=true, no_order=true
  • rejects runtime assertions and sensitive/provider/account/order/capital metadata
  • canonical JSON and deterministic SHA-256 digest

Verification

  • tests-first RED: missing implementation import
  • focused + relevant: 42 passed
  • full: 448 passed, 5 skipped
  • Ruff changed paths + full repository: passed
  • compile changed paths + application/tests: passed
  • exact two-file scope, diff integrity, and high-confidence secret gates: passed

Boundary

This PR is non-live and must remain open/unmerged pending explicit human merge/deploy authority. It does not establish MATCHED, active, fill, capital, order, paper, shadow, or live authority.

Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com>

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1ffea35397

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com>

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: efcc9de619

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Comment thread application/reconciliation_service.py Outdated
Co-Authored-By: Codex <noreply@openai.com>

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1afc2a3129

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +33 to +39
("fill",),
("fills",),
("header",),
("headers",),
("jwt",),
("notional",),
("order",),

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Reject plural runtime order keys

When callers pass the repository's normal execution-summary fields such as orders_submitted, orders_filled, or orders_partially_filled, tokenization yields tokens such as orders and filled, while this denylist only contains the exact tokens order, fill, and fills. The builder therefore accepts material order/fill assertions even though this boundary is intended to reject them and returns an envelope asserting no_order=true; include the plural and inflected forms or normalize them to their forbidden roots.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Comment on lines +113 to +115
if isinstance(value, (list, tuple)):
for item in value:
_reject_non_live_metadata(item)

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Traverse arbitrary nested metadata containers

When a metadata value uses another standard container such as UserList or deque, recursion stops at this check, so an input such as {"outer": UserList([{"password": "..."}])} is accepted even though the public metadata value type is Any and the same nested dictionary in a list is rejected. This allows credential-bearing metadata to bypass the fail-closed gate based solely on its container type; traverse general non-string containers or explicitly reject unsupported value types.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@Pigbibi

Pigbibi commented Aug 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Closing unmerged and freezing this review loop. SOXL remains negative-learning/non-live/MISSING/no_order. Required CI was green, but consecutive exact-head security/order assertion findings did not close within the one-remediation boundary. Per the anti-review-loop rule, evidence is retained; no further patch, review, merge, or deploy will be performed from this PR.

@Pigbibi Pigbibi closed this Aug 4, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant