The internal deployment exists (deployments repo, `mirror/`: quadlet, nginx
edge, certbot, route53, VM SOP), so the docs that said "the real fix is HTTPS"
were describing a future that has arrived from a different direction — TLS
terminates in nginx on the service VM, not in this process, and there is no
`--https` flag here.
SECURITY.md's trust model said "trusted: anyone who can open a TCP connection".
With an allow list in production that sentence was simply no longer true, so the
table now names the address space, and a new section says what the list is and
what it is not: one wall (network/nginx) and one belt (the app, for the path
that bypasses nginx at 127.0.0.1:8080), plus the thing neither can do — once two
browsers are in the room their media never asks the server again, and it can
never tell you *who*, only *where from*. Saying "defence in depth" about that
would have been the dishonest version.
PLAN.md gains A19 (TLS + admission in production, LOCKED) and A18 becomes
deprioritised rather than deleted — standalone `mirror serve --https` is still
worth having for offline/ad-hoc use, it just stopped being the thing blocking
cross-device sharing, and candidate phase 1 is now share-page resilience.
AGENTS.md gains the two rules most likely to be broken by a well-meaning edit:
trust XFF only from a trusted proxy, and change the nginx and app lists in the
same commit.
LLM-Generated: true
PLAN.md locks the architectural decisions (WebRTC mesh with the sharer as
sole offerer, JSON-only signaling, in-memory roster with no database, no
auth, no CDN, Linux as the reference platform) and records the roster rules,
the verification ladder, and the constraints that are accepted rather than
hidden: the secure-context requirement, mesh upload scaling with watcher
count, and the Wayland portal's per-share prompt.
Phases are deliberately not written yet -- the prototype and its tests came
first, so .agents/phases/todo/ holds only a README pointing at the candidate
phase list in PLAN.md section 7.
SECURITY.md answers the question a no-auth tool has to answer: not "who is
allowed in" but "where is this allowed to run". It separates what an
unauthenticated LAN visitor can do from the guarantees that are enforced and
named to a test, and tells users the two things they will actually hit --
that http://<lan-ip> hides getDisplayMedia, and that on Wayland the
compositor asks every time and mirror must not work around it.
LLM-Generated: true
ducoterra