From 3cecb5b3e0dc717b987bf630bcc3b4815527534e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: VantisOS Team Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2026 19:05:24 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] fix: remove remaining 48 VantisOS/ duplicate files All files already exist at root level. Remove the VantisOS/ prefix duplicates to complete the migration started in PR #81. --- VantisOS/examples/desktop_app.rs | 183 --------- VantisOS/examples/distributed_systems.rs | 86 ---- VantisOS/examples/iot/edge_computing.rs | 172 -------- VantisOS/examples/iot/power_management.rs | 110 ----- VantisOS/examples/iot/temperature_sensor.rs | 84 ---- VantisOS/examples/iot_temperature_sensor.rs | 86 ---- VantisOS/examples/kubernetes_basic.rs | 100 ----- VantisOS/examples/mobile_app.rs | 102 ----- VantisOS/examples/multi_cloud_deploy.rs | 90 ---- VantisOS/governance/SECURITY_TARGET.md | 31 -- VantisOS/governance/THREAT_MODEL.md | 29 -- VantisOS/governance/TRACEABILITY.md | 9 - .../certification/common-criteria/ST.md | 81 ---- .../certification/common-criteria/TOE.md | 73 ---- .../common-criteria/threat-model.md | 61 --- .../do-178c/configuration-management.md | 33 -- .../do-178c/high-level-requirements.md | 28 -- .../do-178c/low-level-requirements.md | 28 -- .../do-178c/quality-assurance.md | 26 -- .../certification/do-178c/system-overview.md | 52 --- .../do-178c/traceability-matrix.csv | 9 - .../do-178c/verification-plan.md | 42 -- VantisOS/monitoring/alertmanager.yml | 70 ---- .../monitoring/alerts/vantisos-alerts.yml | 153 ------- VantisOS/monitoring/grafana-dashboard.json | 192 --------- VantisOS/monitoring/prometheus.yml | 54 --- VantisOS/rfc/0000-template.md | 110 ----- ...-webassembly-primary-application-format.md | 273 ------------- ...-legacy-airlock-compatibility-subsystem.md | 321 --------------- VantisOS/rfc/0003-reject-posix-compliance.md | 316 --------------- ...ustry-compliance-certifications-roadmap.md | 383 ------------------ ...006-ai-powered-code-review-vantis-guard.md | 378 ----------------- .../rfc/0007-zero-trust-security-model.md | 231 ----------- VantisOS/rfc/RFC_PROCESS.md | 344 ---------------- VantisOS/security/crypto_cascade.rs | 13 - VantisOS/security/panic_protocol.rs | 23 -- .../supply-chain/build-threat-model.md | 48 --- VantisOS/security/supply-chain/provenance.md | 17 - VantisOS/security/supply-chain/slsa-policy.md | 55 --- VantisOS/security/vault.rs | 32 -- VantisOS/security/vault_policy.toml | 7 - VantisOS/tools/dev_setup_ultimate.sh | 28 -- VantisOS/tools/vlog | 3 - VantisOS/well-known/security.txt | 12 - {VantisOS/installer => installer}/.gitkeep | 0 {VantisOS/isolinux => isolinux}/.gitkeep | 0 {VantisOS/kernel => kernel}/.gitkeep | 0 {VantisOS/release => release}/iso/vantis.cfg | 0 48 files changed, 4578 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/desktop_app.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/distributed_systems.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/iot/edge_computing.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/iot/power_management.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/iot/temperature_sensor.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/iot_temperature_sensor.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/kubernetes_basic.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/mobile_app.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/examples/multi_cloud_deploy.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/SECURITY_TARGET.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/THREAT_MODEL.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/TRACEABILITY.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/ST.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/TOE.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/threat-model.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/configuration-management.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/high-level-requirements.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/low-level-requirements.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/quality-assurance.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/system-overview.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/traceability-matrix.csv delete mode 100644 VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/verification-plan.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/monitoring/alertmanager.yml delete mode 100644 VantisOS/monitoring/alerts/vantisos-alerts.yml delete mode 100644 VantisOS/monitoring/grafana-dashboard.json delete mode 100644 VantisOS/monitoring/prometheus.yml delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0000-template.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0001-webassembly-primary-application-format.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0002-legacy-airlock-compatibility-subsystem.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0003-reject-posix-compliance.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0004-industry-compliance-certifications-roadmap.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0006-ai-powered-code-review-vantis-guard.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/0007-zero-trust-security-model.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/rfc/RFC_PROCESS.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/crypto_cascade.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/panic_protocol.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/supply-chain/build-threat-model.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/supply-chain/provenance.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/supply-chain/slsa-policy.md delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/vault.rs delete mode 100644 VantisOS/security/vault_policy.toml delete mode 100644 VantisOS/tools/dev_setup_ultimate.sh delete mode 100644 VantisOS/tools/vlog delete mode 100644 VantisOS/well-known/security.txt rename {VantisOS/installer => installer}/.gitkeep (100%) rename {VantisOS/isolinux => isolinux}/.gitkeep (100%) rename {VantisOS/kernel => kernel}/.gitkeep (100%) rename {VantisOS/release => release}/iso/vantis.cfg (100%) diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/desktop_app.rs b/VantisOS/examples/desktop_app.rs deleted file mode 100644 index b73878246..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/desktop_app.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,183 +0,0 @@ -//! Desktop Application Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to create a simple desktop application -//! using VantisOS Flux graphics framework and Classic Shell. - -use vantis::verified::flux::window::Window; -use vantis::verified::flux::renderer::Renderer; -use vantis::verified::flux::widget::{Button, Label, TextBox}; -use vantis::userspace::ui::shells::classic::ClassicShell; - -fn main() -> Result<(), Box> { - println!("VantisOS Desktop Application Example"); - println!("=====================================\n"); - - // Initialize Classic Shell desktop environment - let shell = ClassicShell::new()?; - println!("Classic Shell initialized"); - - // Create main window - let mut window = Window::new("VantisOS Calculator", 400, 500)?; - window.set_position(100, 100)?; - window.set_resizable(false)?; - println!("Main window created"); - - // Initialize renderer - let renderer = Renderer::new(&window)?; - - // Create UI widgets - // Display label - let display = Label::new("0", 20, 20, 360, 50)?; - display.set_font_size(32)?; - display.set_alignment("right")?; - window.add_widget(Box::new(display))?; - - // Number buttons (0-9) - let button_positions = [ - (20, 100, "7"), (130, 100, "8"), (240, 100, "9"), - (20, 170, "4"), (130, 170, "5"), (240, 170, "6"), - (20, 240, "1"), (130, 240, "2"), (240, 240, "3"), - (20, 310, "0"), - ]; - - for (x, y, label) in button_positions.iter() { - let button = Button::new(label, *x, *y, 100, 50)?; - button.set_click_handler(move || { - println!("Button {} clicked", label); - // Add button click logic here - })?; - window.add_widget(Box::new(button))?; - } - - // Operation buttons - let op_positions = [ - (350, 100, "/"), (350, 170, "*"), (350, 240, "-"), - (350, 310, "+"), (350, 380, "="), - ]; - - for (x, y, op) in op_positions.iter() { - let button = Button::new(op, *x, *y, 40, 50)?; - button.set_color(100, 149, 237)?; // Cornflower blue - button.set_click_handler(move || { - println!("Operation {} clicked", op); - // Add operation logic here - })?; - window.add_widget(Box::new(button))?; - } - - // Clear button - let clear = Button::new("C", 130, 380, 100, 50)?; - clear.set_color(220, 20, 60)?; // Crimson - clear.set_click_handler(|| { - println!("Clear button clicked"); - // Clear display logic here - })?; - window.add_widget(Box::new(clear))?; - - // Show window - window.show()?; - println!("Window displayed"); - - // Start main event loop - println!("Starting desktop application...\n"); - shell.run_event_loop()?; - - Ok(()) -} - -// Calculator logic -struct Calculator { - display: String, - current_value: f64, - previous_value: f64, - operation: Option, - new_number: bool, -} - -impl Calculator { - fn new() -> Self { - Calculator { - display: "0".to_string(), - current_value: 0.0, - previous_value: 0.0, - operation: None, - new_number: true, - } - } - - fn press_number(&mut self, digit: char) { - if self.new_number { - self.display = digit.to_string(); - self.new_number = false; - } else { - self.display.push(digit); - } - self.current_value = self.display.parse().unwrap_or(0.0); - } - - fn press_operation(&mut self, op: char) { - self.operation = Some(op); - self.previous_value = self.current_value; - self.new_number = true; - } - - fn calculate(&mut self) { - if let Some(op) = self.operation { - match op { - '+' => self.current_value = self.previous_value + self.current_value, - '-' => self.current_value = self.previous_value - self.current_value, - '*' => self.current_value = self.previous_value * self.current_value, - '/' => { - if self.current_value != 0.0 { - self.current_value = self.previous_value / self.current_value; - } - } - _ => {} - } - self.display = self.current_value.to_string(); - self.operation = None; - self.new_number = true; - } - } - - fn clear(&mut self) { - self.display = "0".to_string(); - self.current_value = 0.0; - self.previous_value = 0.0; - self.operation = None; - self.new_number = true; - } -} - -#[cfg(test)] -mod tests { - use super::*; - - #[test] - fn test_calculator_addition() { - let mut calc = Calculator::new(); - calc.press_number('5'); - calc.press_operation('+'); - calc.press_number('3'); - calc.calculate(); - assert_eq!(calc.current_value, 8.0); - } - - #[test] - fn test_calculator_multiplication() { - let mut calc = Calculator::new(); - calc.press_number('4'); - calc.press_operation('*'); - calc.press_number('6'); - calc.calculate(); - assert_eq!(calc.current_value, 24.0); - } - - #[test] - fn test_calculator_clear() { - let mut calc = Calculator::new(); - calc.press_number('9'); - calc.clear(); - assert_eq!(calc.display, "0"); - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/distributed_systems.rs b/VantisOS/examples/distributed_systems.rs deleted file mode 100644 index 0ae87181b..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/distributed_systems.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,86 +0,0 @@ -//! Distributed Systems Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates distributed computing features in VantisOS, -//! including cluster management, distributed storage, and disaster recovery. - -#[tokio::main] -async fn main() -> Result<(), Box> { - println!("VantisOS Distributed Systems Example\n"); - println!("=====================================\n"); - - demonstrate_cluster_management(); - - demonstrate_distributed_storage(); - - demonstrate_high_availability(); - - demonstrate_disaster_recovery(); - - println!("\nExample completed successfully!"); - Ok(()) -} - -fn demonstrate_cluster_management() { - println!("1. Cluster Management"); - println!(" ------------------"); - println!(" Cluster Name: production-cluster"); - println!(" Nodes:"); - println!(" - node-1 (192.168.1.10) - Leader"); - println!(" - node-2 (192.168.1.11) - Follower"); - println!(" - node-3 (192.168.1.12) - Follower"); - println!(" Status: Healthy"); - println!(" Leader Election: Raft consensus"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_distributed_storage() { - println!("2. Distributed Storage"); - println!(" -------------------"); - println!(" Storage Backend: Ceph"); - println!(" Pool Name: production-pool"); - println!(" Volumes:"); - println!(" - app-data: 100 GB, 3x replication"); - println!(" - logs: 50 GB, 2x replication"); - println!(" - backups: 500 GB, 3x replication"); - println!(" Total Capacity: 2 TB"); - println!(" Available: 1.5 TB"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_high_availability() { - println!("3. High Availability"); - println!(" -----------------"); - println!(" Service: api-gateway"); - println!(" Configuration:"); - println!(" - Active instances: 3"); - println!(" - Health check interval: 30s"); - println!(" - Failover timeout: 60s"); - println!(" Health Status:"); - println!(" - instance-1: Healthy"); - println!(" - instance-2: Healthy"); - println!(" - instance-3: Healthy"); - println!(" Failover History: None"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_disaster_recovery() { - println!("4. Disaster Recovery"); - println!(" -----------------"); - println!(" Cluster: production-cluster"); - println!(" Backup Schedule: Daily at 02:00 UTC"); - println!(" Retention: 30 days"); - println!(" Backup Location: S3 (us-west-2)"); - println!(" Last Backup: 2024-03-02 02:00:00 UTC"); - println!(" Backup Size: 1.2 TB"); - println!(" RPO (Recovery Point Objective): 24 hours"); - println!(" RTO (Recovery Time Objective): 4 hours"); - println!(); - - println!(" Recovery Plan:"); - println!(" 1. Provision new cluster infrastructure"); - println!(" 2. Restore from latest backup"); - println!(" 3. Verify data integrity"); - println!(" 4. Update DNS records"); - println!(" 5. Verify application health"); - println!(); -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/iot/edge_computing.rs b/VantisOS/examples/iot/edge_computing.rs deleted file mode 100644 index 8356c7ce8..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/iot/edge_computing.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,172 +0,0 @@ -//! Edge Computing Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to use the edge computing framework. - -use vantisos::edge::framework::*; -use vantisos::edge::processing::*; -use vantisos::edge::sync::*; -use vantisos::edge::offline::*; -use vantisos::edge::aggregation::*; -use vantisos::drivers::iot::sensors::temperature::*; - -fn main() { - // Initialize edge computing - vantisos::edge::init(); - - // Create edge framework - let mut framework = EdgeFramework::new(4); - framework.init(); - - // Create data processor - let processing_config = ProcessingConfig { - processing_type: ProcessingType::Aggregate, - batch_size: 10, - timeout_ms: 1000, - parallel: false, - }; - - let mut processor = DataProcessor::new(processing_config); - processor.init(); - - // Create cloud synchronizer - let sync_config = SyncConfig { - direction: SyncDirection::Bidirectional, - interval_ms: 60000, - retry_count: 3, - conflict_resolution: ConflictResolution::NewestWins, - }; - - let mut synchronizer = CloudSynchronizer::new(sync_config); - synchronizer.init(); - - // Create offline manager - let offline_config = OfflineConfig { - auto_reconnect: true, - reconnect_interval_ms: 5000, - max_queue_size: 1000, - persist_data: true, - }; - - let mut offline_manager = OfflineManager::new(offline_config); - offline_manager.init(); - - // Create data aggregator - let mut aggregator = DataAggregator::new(60000); - aggregator.init(); - - // Create temperature sensor - let temp_config = TemperatureSensorConfig { - sensor_type: TemperatureSensorType::Custom, - i2c_address: Some(0x48), - pin: None, - update_interval_ms: 1000, - }; - - let mut temp_sensor = TemperatureSensor::new(0, temp_config); - temp_sensor.init(); - - println!("Edge computing example started"); - - // Main loop - loop { - let current_time = vantisos::time::get_current_time(); - - // Read temperature - match temp_sensor.read_celsius() { - Ok(temp) => { - println!("Temperature: {:.2}°C", temp); - - // Add data point to aggregator - aggregator.add_data_point(temp, current_time); - - // Process data - let data = format!("{:.2}", temp).as_bytes().to_vec(); - match processor.process(&data) { - Ok(result) => { - println!("Processed: {} items, {} success, {} failed, {} ms", - result.processed_count, - result.success_count, - result.failure_count, - result.processing_time_ms); - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Processing error: {:?}", e); - } - } - - // Create task for edge processing - let task_config = TaskConfig { - priority: TaskPriority::Normal, - task_type: TaskType::Compute, - timeout_ms: 5000, - retry_count: 3, - cpu_affinity: None, - }; - - let task_id = framework.create_task("process_temperature", task_config); - framework.submit_task(task_id); - - // Complete task - framework.complete_task(task_id, TaskResult::Success(0)); - - // Add to offline queue if needed - if offline_manager.is_offline() { - match offline_manager.add_to_queue(data.len() as u32, 1) { - Ok(item_id) => { - println!("Added to offline queue: {}", item_id); - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Queue error: {:?}", e); - } - } - } - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Error reading temperature: {:?}", e); - } - } - - // Aggregate data every 10 seconds - if current_time % 10000 == 0 { - match aggregator.aggregate(AggregationType::Average) { - Ok(result) => { - println!("Aggregated: {:.2} ({} samples)", result.value, result.count); - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Aggregation error: {:?}", e); - } - } - } - - // Synchronize with cloud every 60 seconds - if current_time % 60000 == 0 { - match synchronizer.sync(current_time) { - Ok(result) => { - println!("Synced: {} uploaded, {} downloaded, {} conflicts, {} ms", - result.uploaded_count, - result.downloaded_count, - result.conflict_count, - result.sync_time_ms); - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Sync error: {:?}", e); - } - } - } - - // Process offline queue if online - if offline_manager.is_online() && offline_manager.get_queue_size() > 0 { - match offline_manager.process_queue() { - Ok(count) => { - println!("Processed {} items from offline queue", count); - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Queue processing error: {:?}", e); - } - } - } - - // Sleep for 1 second - vantisos::time::sleep(1000); - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/iot/power_management.rs b/VantisOS/examples/iot/power_management.rs deleted file mode 100644 index b82ac2809..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/iot/power_management.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,110 +0,0 @@ -//! Power Management Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to use the power management system. - -use vantisos::power::management::*; -use vantisos::power::frequency::*; -use vantisos::power::modes::*; -use vantisos::power::monitoring::*; - -fn main() { - // Initialize power management - vantisos::power::init(); - - // Create power manager - let power_config = PowerConfig { - policy: PowerPolicy::Balanced, - idle_timeout_ms: 5000, - sleep_timeout_ms: 30000, - deep_sleep_timeout_ms: 60000, - }; - - let mut power_manager = PowerManager::new(power_config); - power_manager.init(); - - // Create frequency scaler - let freq_config = FrequencyConfig { - governor: FrequencyGovernor::Ondemand, - min_frequency: CpuFrequency::MHz400, - max_frequency: CpuFrequency::MHz2000, - up_threshold: 80, - down_threshold: 20, - sampling_rate_ms: 100, - }; - - let mut freq_scaler = FrequencyScaler::new(freq_config); - freq_scaler.init(); - - // Create power monitor - let mut power_monitor = PowerMonitor::new(); - power_monitor.init(); - - // Create power mode controller - let mode_config = PowerModeConfig { - mode: PowerMode::Active, - wake_up_sources: WakeUpSources { - gpio: true, - timer: true, - uart: false, - i2c: false, - spi: false, - adc: false, - usb: false, - ethernet: false, - }, - retention: true, - }; - - let mut mode_controller = PowerModeController::new(mode_config); - mode_controller.init(); - - println!("Power management example started"); - - // Main loop - loop { - let current_time = vantisos::time::get_current_time(); - - // Update power measurement - power_monitor.update_measurement(current_time); - - // Get current power measurement - let measurement = power_monitor.get_measurement(); - println!("Power: {} mV, {} mA, {} mW", - measurement.voltage_mv, - measurement.current_ma, - measurement.power_mw); - - // Update battery information - power_monitor.update_battery_info(); - let battery_info = power_monitor.get_battery_info(); - println!("Battery: {}%, {} mV, {:?}", - battery_info.level.percentage, - battery_info.level.voltage_mv, - battery_info.status); - - // Update activity - power_manager.update_activity(current_time); - - // Get current power state - let power_state = power_manager.get_state(); - println!("Power state: {:?}", power_state); - - // Get current power policy - let power_policy = power_manager.get_policy(); - println!("Power policy: {:?}", power_policy); - - // Get current CPU frequency - let cpu_frequency = freq_scaler.get_frequency(); - println!("CPU frequency: {:?}", cpu_frequency); - - // Get current load - let load = freq_scaler.get_load(); - println!("CPU load: {}%", load); - - // Update frequency based on load - freq_scaler.update(current_time, load); - - // Sleep for 1 second - vantisos::time::sleep(1000); - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/iot/temperature_sensor.rs b/VantisOS/examples/iot/temperature_sensor.rs deleted file mode 100644 index 3e973a202..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/iot/temperature_sensor.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,84 +0,0 @@ -//! Temperature Sensor Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to use the temperature sensor driver. - -use vantisos::drivers::iot::sensors::temperature::*; -use vantisos::drivers::iot::i2c::*; -use vantisos::network::mqtt::*; - -fn main() { - // Initialize I2C - let i2c_config = I2cConfig { - speed: I2cSpeed::Standard, - clock_stretching: true, - general_call: false, - slave_address: None, - }; - - let i2c_master = I2cMaster::new(0, i2c_config); - i2c_master.init(); - - // Create temperature sensor - let temp_config = TemperatureSensorConfig { - sensor_type: TemperatureSensorType::Custom, - i2c_address: Some(0x48), - pin: None, - update_interval_ms: 1000, - }; - - let mut temp_sensor = TemperatureSensor::new(0, temp_config); - temp_sensor.init(); - - // Create MQTT client - let mqtt_config = MqttConfig { - version: MqttVersion::Mqtt3_1_1, - client_id: "vantisos_temp_sensor", - broker_address: "broker.example.com", - broker_port: 1883, - username: Some("user"), - password: Some("pass"), - keep_alive: 60, - clean_session: true, - }; - - let mut mqtt_client = MqttClient::new(mqtt_config); - mqtt_client.init(); - mqtt_client.connect(); - - // Subscribe to commands - mqtt_client.subscribe("commands/temperature", MqttQos::AtLeastOnce); - - println!("Temperature sensor example started"); - - // Main loop - loop { - // Read temperature - match temp_sensor.read_celsius() { - Ok(temp_c) => { - let temp_f = temp_c * 9.0 / 5.0 + 32.0; - let temp_k = temp_c + 273.15; - - println!("Temperature: {:.2}°C ({:.2}°F, {:.2}K)", temp_c, temp_f, temp_k); - - // Publish to MQTT - let payload = format!("{{"celsius": {:.2}, "fahrenheit": {:.2}, "kelvin": {:.2}}}", - temp_c, temp_f, temp_k); - - let message = MqttMessage { - topic: "sensors/temperature", - payload: payload.as_bytes(), - qos: MqttQos::AtLeastOnce, - retain: false, - }; - - mqtt_client.publish(message); - } - Err(e) => { - eprintln!("Error reading temperature: {:?}", e); - } - } - - // Sleep for 1 second - vantisos::time::sleep(1000); - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/iot_temperature_sensor.rs b/VantisOS/examples/iot_temperature_sensor.rs deleted file mode 100644 index dd899143a..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/iot_temperature_sensor.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,86 +0,0 @@ -//! IoT Temperature Sensor Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to read temperature data from a sensor -//! and process it using VantisOS IoT framework. - -use vantis::verified::drivers::iot::sensors::temperature::TemperatureSensor; -use vantis::verified::drivers::iot::gpio::GpioPin; -use vantis::verified::iot::edge_computing::EdgeTask; - -fn main() -> Result<(), Box> { - println!("VantisOS IoT Temperature Sensor Example"); - println!("=========================================\n"); - - // Initialize temperature sensor (I2C based) - let mut temp_sensor = TemperatureSensor::new(0x48)?; // I2C address 0x48 - - // Configure sensor - temp_sensor.configure_continuous()?; - println!("Temperature sensor initialized"); - - // Create GPIO pin for LED indicator - let mut led = GpioPin::new(17)?; // GPIO 17 - led.set_output()?; - - println!("Starting temperature monitoring loop...\n"); - - // Main monitoring loop - for i in 1..=10 { - // Read temperature - let temp_c = temp_sensor.read_temperature()?; - let temp_f = temp_c * 9.0 / 5.0 + 32.0; - - println!("Reading #{}", i); - println!(" Temperature: {:.2}°C ({:.2}°F)", temp_c, temp_f); - - // LED indication based on temperature - if temp_c > 30.0 { - led.set_high()?; - println!(" Status: HIGH - LED ON"); - } else { - led.set_low()?; - println!(" Status: NORMAL - LED OFF"); - } - - // Create edge computing task - let task = EdgeTask::new(format!("temp_reading_{}", i)); - task.add_data("temperature_c", temp_c)?; - task.add_data("temperature_f", temp_f)?; - task.add_data("timestamp", chrono::Utc::now().timestamp())?; - - // Process task locally - task.process()?; - - // Check threshold and trigger alert - if temp_c > 35.0 { - println!(" ⚠️ ALERT: High temperature detected!"); - task.set_alert("high_temperature")?; - } - - // Wait 2 seconds before next reading - std::thread::sleep(std::time::Duration::from_secs(2)); - } - - println!("\nTemperature monitoring completed"); - Ok(()) -} - -#[cfg(test)] -mod tests { - use super::*; - - #[test] - fn test_temperature_reading() { - let mut sensor = TemperatureSensor::new(0x48).unwrap(); - let temp = sensor.read_temperature().unwrap(); - assert!(temp > -50.0 && temp < 100.0, "Invalid temperature reading"); - } - - #[test] - fn test_gpio_control() { - let mut led = GpioPin::new(17).unwrap(); - led.set_output().unwrap(); - led.set_high().unwrap(); - led.set_low().unwrap(); - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/kubernetes_basic.rs b/VantisOS/examples/kubernetes_basic.rs deleted file mode 100644 index 105467890..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/kubernetes_basic.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,100 +0,0 @@ -//! Basic Kubernetes Operations Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to use VantisOS to interact with Kubernetes clusters. - -use std::collections::HashMap; - -#[tokio::main] -async fn main() -> Result<(), Box> { - println!("VantisOS Kubernetes Basic Operations Example\n"); - println!("============================================\n"); - - // In a real application, you would load the kubeconfig from a file - // let kubeconfig = vantisos::verified::kubernetes::KubeConfig::from_file("~/.kube/config")?; - // let client = vantisos::verified::kubernetes::KubernetesClient::new(kubeconfig)?; - - println!("This example demonstrates the configuration structures used in VantisOS.\n"); - - // Example: Pod configuration - demonstrate_pod_config(); - - // Example: Deployment configuration - demonstrate_deployment_config(); - - // Example: Service configuration - demonstrate_service_config(); - - // Example: ConfigMap configuration - demonstrate_configmap_config(); - - // Example: Secret configuration - demonstrate_secret_config(); - - println!("\nExample completed successfully!"); - Ok(()) -} - -fn demonstrate_pod_config() { - println!("1. Pod Configuration"); - println!(" ----------------"); - println!(" Name: nginx-pod"); - println!(" Namespace: default"); - println!(" Labels: app=nginx"); - println!(" Containers:"); - println!(" - name: nginx"); - println!(" image: nginx:1.21"); - println!(" ports: 80/TCP"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_deployment_config() { - println!("2. Deployment Configuration"); - println!(" -----------------------"); - println!(" Name: nginx-deployment"); - println!(" Namespace: default"); - println!(" Replicas: 3"); - println!(" Strategy: RollingUpdate"); - println!(" - maxSurge: 1"); - println!(" - maxUnavailable: 0"); - println!(" Selector: app=nginx"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_service_config() { - println!("3. Service Configuration"); - println!(" ---------------------"); - println!(" Name: nginx-service"); - println!(" Namespace: default"); - println!(" Type: LoadBalancer"); - println!(" Selector: app=nginx"); - println!(" Ports:"); - println!(" - port: 80"); - println!(" targetPort: 80"); - println!(" protocol: TCP"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_configmap_config() { - println!("4. ConfigMap Configuration"); - println!(" -----------------------"); - println!(" Name: app-config"); - println!(" Namespace: default"); - println!(" Data:"); - println!(" database.url: postgresql://localhost:5432/mydb"); - println!(" cache.size: "1024""); - println!(" log.level: info"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_secret_config() { - println!("5. Secret Configuration"); - println!(" --------------------"); - println!(" Name: app-secret"); - println!(" Namespace: default"); - println!(" Type: Opaque"); - println!(" Data: (base64 encoded)"); - println!(" username: admin"); - println!(" password: ********"); - println!(" api-key: ********"); - println!(); -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/mobile_app.rs b/VantisOS/examples/mobile_app.rs deleted file mode 100644 index d6870a5ef..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/mobile_app.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,102 +0,0 @@ -//! Mobile Application Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to create a simple mobile application -//! using VantisOS mobile framework with touch gestures. - -use vantis::verified::mobile::ui::MobileUI; -use vantis::verified::mobile::touch::{GestureType, TouchEvent}; -use vantis::verified::mobile::battery::BatteryManager; - -fn main() -> Result<(), Box> { - println!("VantisOS Mobile Application Example"); - println!("====================================\n"); - - // Initialize mobile UI - let mut ui = MobileUI::new("VantisOS Demo App")?; - - // Setup main screen - ui.create_screen("main")?; - ui.add_label("Welcome to VantisOS!")?; - ui.add_button("Start", 100, 200)?; - ui.add_button("Settings", 100, 300)?; - - // Setup settings screen - ui.create_screen("settings")?; - ui.add_label("Settings")?; - ui.add_toggle("Dark Mode", 100, 200)?; - ui.add_slider("Brightness", 100, 300, 0, 100, 80)?; - ui.add_button("Back", 100, 400)?; - - // Initialize battery manager - let battery = BatteryManager::new()?; - let level = battery.get_level()?; - println!("Battery level: {}%", level); - - // Set battery optimization - battery.enable_power_saving()?; - println!("Power saving mode enabled"); - - // Set up gesture handlers - ui.register_gesture(GestureType::Tap, |event| { - println!("Tap detected at ({}, {})", event.x, event.y); - handle_tap(event) - })?; - - ui.register_gesture(GestureType::Swipe, |event| { - println!("Swipe detected: {:?}", event.direction); - handle_swipe(event) - })?; - - // Start UI event loop - println!("Starting mobile application...\n"); - ui.run_event_loop()?; - - Ok(()) -} - -fn handle_tap(event: TouchEvent) -> Result<(), Box> { - // Handle button taps based on coordinates - if event.y >= 200 && event.y <= 250 { - println!("Start button tapped!"); - // Start application logic here - } else if event.y >= 300 && event.y <= 350 { - println!("Settings button tapped!"); - // Navigate to settings - } else if event.y >= 400 && event.y <= 450 { - println!("Back button tapped!"); - // Navigate back - } - Ok(()) -} - -fn handle_swipe(event: TouchEvent) -> Result<(), Box> { - match event.direction { - Some(direction) => { - println!("Swipe direction: {:?}", direction); - // Handle swipe navigation - Ok(()) - } - None => { - println!("Invalid swipe"); - Ok(()) - } - } -} - -#[cfg(test)] -mod tests { - use super::*; - - #[test] - fn test_mobile_ui_creation() { - let ui = MobileUI::new("Test App").unwrap(); - assert_eq!(ui.get_title(), "Test App"); - } - - #[test] - fn test_battery_level() { - let battery = BatteryManager::new().unwrap(); - let level = battery.get_level().unwrap(); - assert!(level >= 0 && level <= 100); - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/examples/multi_cloud_deploy.rs b/VantisOS/examples/multi_cloud_deploy.rs deleted file mode 100644 index a5a82eb87..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/examples/multi_cloud_deploy.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,90 +0,0 @@ -//! Multi-Cloud Deployment Example -//! -//! This example demonstrates how to deploy resources across multiple cloud providers -//! using VantisOS's unified multi-cloud interface. - -use std::collections::HashMap; - -#[tokio::main] -async fn main() -> Result<(), Box> { - println!("VantisOS Multi-Cloud Deployment Example\n"); - println!("=========================================\n"); - - // This example shows how to use the multi-cloud abstraction layer - demonstrate_multi_cloud_setup(); - - demonstrate_aws_deployment(); - - demonstrate_azure_deployment(); - - demonstrate_gcp_deployment(); - - demonstrate_cross_provider_comparison(); - - println!("\nExample completed successfully!"); - Ok(()) -} - -fn demonstrate_multi_cloud_setup() { - println!("1. Multi-Cloud Setup"); - println!(" -----------------"); - println!(" Creating multi-cloud manager..."); - println!(" Adding cloud providers:"); - println!(" - AWS (us-east-1)"); - println!(" - Azure (eastus)"); - println!(" - GCP (us-central1)"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_aws_deployment() { - println!("2. AWS Deployment"); - println!(" --------------"); - println!(" Provider: AWS"); - println!(" Region: us-east-1"); - println!(" Instance Type: t3.medium"); - println!(" OS: Ubuntu 22.04 LTS"); - println!(" Storage: 20 GB SSD"); - println!(" Network: Default VPC"); - println!(" Cost: ~$30.04/month"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_azure_deployment() { - println!("3. Azure Deployment"); - println!(" ----------------"); - println!(" Provider: Azure"); - println!(" Region: eastus"); - println!(" Instance Type: Standard_D2s_v3"); - println!(" OS: Ubuntu 22.04 LTS"); - println!(" Storage: 128 GB Premium SSD"); - println!(" Network: Default VNet"); - println!(" Cost: ~$80.64/month"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_gcp_deployment() { - println!("4. GCP Deployment"); - println!(" --------------"); - println!(" Provider: GCP"); - println!(" Region: us-central1-a"); - println!(" Instance Type: e2-medium"); - println!(" OS: Ubuntu 22.04 LTS"); - println!(" Storage: 20 GB Standard SSD"); - println!(" Network: Default VPC"); - println!(" Cost: ~$28.08/month"); - println!(); -} - -fn demonstrate_cross_provider_comparison() { - println!("5. Cross-Provider Comparison"); - println!(" ------------------------"); - println!(" Resource Type: Virtual Machine"); - println!(" Cost Comparison:"); - println!(" - AWS: $30.04/month"); - println!(" - Azure: $80.64/month"); - println!(" - GCP: $28.08/month"); - println!(); - println!(" Recommendation: GCP offers the lowest cost for this workload"); - println!(" However, AWS provides the best balance of cost and features"); - println!(); -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/SECURITY_TARGET.md b/VantisOS/governance/SECURITY_TARGET.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6fc96556e..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/SECURITY_TARGET.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,31 +0,0 @@ -# VantisOS Security Target (ISO/IEC 15408) - -## TOE Overview -VantisOS is a microkernel-based operating system derived from Redox OS, -designed with strong isolation, minimal TCB and formal verification goals. - -## Security Objectives -- O1: Enforce strict process isolation -- O2: Protect cryptographic material at rest and in use -- O3: Prevent unauthorized kernel interaction -- O4: Support verifiable system integrity -- O5: Provide reproducible builds and supply-chain guarantees - -## Assumptions -- Physical access is partially trusted -- Firmware is measured (TPM / Secure Boot) -- Network access is untrusted by default - -## Threats -- T1: Privilege escalation -- T2: Kernel memory corruption -- T3: Supply-chain compromise -- T4: Data exfiltration via IPC -- T5: Unauthorized kernel modification - -## Security Functional Requirements -- SFR1: Kernel enforces process isolation (MMU) -- SFR2: IPC is authenticated and authorized -- SFR3: Cryptographic keys are protected by Vantis Vault -- SFR4: A/B update integrity verification -- SFR5: Reproducible build provenance diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/THREAT_MODEL.md b/VantisOS/governance/THREAT_MODEL.md deleted file mode 100644 index c4d62843c..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/THREAT_MODEL.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,29 +0,0 @@ -# Threat Model (VantisOS) - -## Scope -This threat model covers: -- Kernel and microkernel subsystems -- IPC and userspace isolation -- Filesystem integrity -- Cryptographic key management -- Supply-chain integrity - -## Assets -- User data -- Cryptographic keys -- Kernel memory -- Filesystem metadata -- Build artifacts - -## Threat Agents -- Local attacker with user privileges -- Remote attacker via network services -- Supply-chain attacker injecting malicious builds -- Malicious or buggy driver code - -## Mitigations -- MMU isolation for each process -- Capability-based IPC -- Signed kernel and root filesystem -- Vault protection and panic protocol -- SLSA-based build pipeline diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/TRACEABILITY.md b/VantisOS/governance/TRACEABILITY.md deleted file mode 100644 index 8d4f82290..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/TRACEABILITY.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9 +0,0 @@ -# Traceability Matrix (DO-178C style) - -| Requirement ID | Requirement | Implementation Module | Test / Evidence | -|---------------|-------------|-----------------------|----------------| -| REQ-SEC-001 | Process isolation | kernel/mmu | unit tests, formal proof | -| REQ-SEC-002 | IPC authorization | kernel/ipc | IPC policy tests | -| REQ-SEC-003 | Key protection | security/vault | Vault tests | -| REQ-SEC-004 | Atomic A/B update | redoxfs/ab_update | integration tests | -| REQ-SEC-005 | Supply chain signing | .github/workflows | signed builds | diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/ST.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/ST.md deleted file mode 100644 index 52b17478a..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/ST.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,81 +0,0 @@ -# Security Target (ST) -## VantisOS Core - ---- - -## 1. TOE Identification - -- TOE Name: VantisOS Core -- TOE Version: 0.1 -- TOE Type: Microkernel-based Operating System -- Assurance Level: EAL 7+ (Augmented) -- Developer: VantisCorp -- Platform: x86_64, ARM64 -- Source Language: Rust (no unsafe without justification) - ---- - -## 2. TOE Overview - -VantisOS Core is a security-focused operating system derived from the Redox OS -codebase. It is designed from inception to support formal verification and -high-assurance certification. - -The TOE includes: -- Vantis Microkernel -- Inter-Process Communication subsystem -- Memory management subsystem -- Deterministic scheduler (fallback mode) -- Immutable system root - -The TOE explicitly excludes: -- Device drivers -- Network stacks -- User applications - -These components execute strictly in user space. - ---- - -## 3. TOE Security Objectives - -### O.KERNEL.ISOLATION -The TOE shall enforce strict isolation between all processes. - -### O.MEMORY.SAFETY -The TOE shall ensure memory safety by construction through the Rust language -and formal verification of critical components. - -### O.MINIMAL_TCB -The TOE shall minimize the Trusted Computing Base by excluding drivers and -non-essential services from kernel space. - -### O.DETERMINISM -The TOE shall provide a deterministic scheduling mode suitable for formal -analysis and certification. - ---- - -## 4. Security Assurance Requirements - -- ADV_FSP.6 (Complete functional specification) -- ADV_TDS.5 (Complete TOE design) -- ADV_IMP.3 (Implementation representation) -- ATE_DPT.4 (Testing: high coverage) -- AVA_VAN.5 (Advanced methodical vulnerability analysis) - ---- - -## 5. Augmentations - -- Formal verification of memory safety -- Formal proof of IPC isolation -- Mathematical proof of scheduler boundedness - ---- - -## 6. Compliance Statement - -This Security Target claims conformance to: -- ISO/IEC 15408-1/2/3 -- Common Criteria EAL 7 Augmented diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/TOE.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/TOE.md deleted file mode 100644 index 39297ab71..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/TOE.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,73 +0,0 @@ -# Target of Evaluation (TOE) -## VantisOS Core - ---- - -## 1. TOE Boundary - -The TOE boundary encompasses only the components executing in kernel mode. - -Included: -- Kernel entry points -- IPC mechanisms -- Virtual memory manager -- Scheduler -- Capability enforcement logic - -Excluded: -- Filesystems -- Device drivers -- Cryptographic services -- Networking -- UI components - ---- - -## 2. Physical Boundary - -The TOE operates on general-purpose hardware without reliance on proprietary -security hardware. - -Optional trusted hardware: -- TPM 2.0 (for future extensions) - ---- - -## 3. Logical Boundary - -The TOE exposes only the following interfaces: -- System calls (syscalls) -- IPC channels -- Interrupt handling - -No dynamic code loading is permitted in kernel space. - ---- - -## 4. Trusted Computing Base (TCB) - -The TCB consists of: -- Vantis Microkernel source code -- Verified Rust compiler toolchain -- Build scripts under SLSA Level 4 controls - -All other components are untrusted by default. - ---- - -## 5. Assumptions - -- A.TRUSTED_BUILD: - The build environment is controlled and verified. - -- A.HARDWARE_INTEGRITY: - The hardware is not maliciously altered. - ---- - -## 6. TOE Environment - -The TOE is intended for deployment in: -- Government systems -- Critical infrastructure -- High-assurance workstations diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/threat-model.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/threat-model.md deleted file mode 100644 index 55167b1c6..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/common-criteria/threat-model.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,61 +0,0 @@ -# Threat Model -## VantisOS Core - ---- - -## 1. Threat Agents - -- Malicious user-space applications -- Compromised drivers -- Insider attackers -- Physical attackers (limited) - ---- - -## 2. Identified Threats - -### T.KERNEL_ESCALATION -An attacker attempts to escalate privileges from user space to kernel space. - -### T.MEMORY_CORRUPTION -An attacker exploits memory corruption vulnerabilities. - -### T.DRIVER_FAILURE -A faulty or malicious driver causes system instability. - -### T.SUPPLY_CHAIN -Malicious code is injected during build or distribution. - ---- - -## 3. Mitigations - -### M.RUST_MEMORY_MODEL -Rust eliminates entire classes of memory corruption vulnerabilities. - -### M.USERSPACE_DRIVERS -Drivers execute outside the kernel, reducing attack surface. - -### M.CAPABILITY_IPC -All IPC is capability-based and explicitly authorized. - -### M.SLSA_BUILD -The build pipeline enforces hermetic builds and provenance tracking. - ---- - -## 4. Residual Risks - -- Side-channel attacks -- Hardware vulnerabilities -- Physical coercion attacks - -These risks are considered outside the TOE scope. - ---- - -## 5. Conclusion - -The VantisOS Core threat model demonstrates that the TOE effectively mitigates -all threats within its defined scope through architectural design and formal -assurance techniques. diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/configuration-management.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/configuration-management.md deleted file mode 100644 index 35b064577..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/configuration-management.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,33 +0,0 @@ -# Software Configuration Management Plan (SCMP) - ---- - -## 1. Configuration Items - -- Source code -- Requirements -- Verification artifacts -- Build scripts - ---- - -## 2. Change Control - -All changes require: -- Requirement reference -- Review approval -- Verification update - ---- - -## 3. Baselines - -- Development baseline -- Verification baseline -- Release baseline - ---- - -## 4. Tool Control - -All tools used in development and verification are version-controlled. diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/high-level-requirements.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/high-level-requirements.md deleted file mode 100644 index 4c108a4bd..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/high-level-requirements.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,28 +0,0 @@ -# High-Level Requirements (HLR) -## VantisOS Core - ---- - -HLR-001: -The kernel shall isolate all user processes from kernel memory. - -HLR-002: -The kernel shall prevent execution of user code in kernel mode. - -HLR-003: -The kernel shall provide deterministic scheduling in certification mode. - -HLR-004: -The kernel shall enforce capability-based access control for IPC. - -HLR-005: -The kernel shall detect and handle invalid system calls safely. - -HLR-006: -The kernel shall operate without dynamic memory allocation during runtime. - -HLR-007: -The kernel shall fail safely in the presence of internal errors. - -HLR-008: -The kernel shall be fully analyzable by static analysis tools. diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/low-level-requirements.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/low-level-requirements.md deleted file mode 100644 index 34aae8ecd..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/low-level-requirements.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,28 +0,0 @@ -# Low-Level Requirements (LLR) -## VantisOS Core - ---- - -LLR-001: -Each process shall execute in a unique virtual address space. - -LLR-002: -The MMU shall mark kernel pages as non-user accessible. - -LLR-003: -All system calls shall validate input parameters before execution. - -LLR-004: -IPC endpoints shall require explicit capability tokens. - -LLR-005: -Scheduler decisions shall complete within a bounded time. - -LLR-006: -No heap allocation shall occur after kernel initialization. - -LLR-007: -Kernel panic shall place the system into a defined safe state. - -LLR-008: -All unsafe Rust blocks shall be documented and reviewed. diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/quality-assurance.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/quality-assurance.md deleted file mode 100644 index b4fc4dd00..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/quality-assurance.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,26 +0,0 @@ -# Software Quality Assurance Plan (SQAP) - ---- - -## 1. QA Objectives - -- Ensure compliance with DO-178C -- Ensure process adherence -- Ensure documentation completeness - ---- - -## 2. Audits - -- Process audits -- Product audits -- Configuration audits - ---- - -## 3. Non-Conformance - -All non-conformances shall be: -- Documented -- Tracked -- Resolved prior to release diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/system-overview.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/system-overview.md deleted file mode 100644 index efe1f123a..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/system-overview.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,52 +0,0 @@ -# System Overview -## VantisOS Core – DO-178C Context - ---- - -## 1. System Purpose - -VantisOS Core is a high-assurance microkernel operating system intended for -use in safety-critical and security-critical environments. - -The system provides: -- Process isolation -- Deterministic scheduling -- Inter-process communication -- Memory protection - ---- - -## 2. Certification Level - -- Standard: RTCA DO-178C -- Software Level: A (Catastrophic Failure Conditions) -- Rationale: Kernel failure may lead to total system compromise. - ---- - -## 3. Software Architecture - -The system is architected as: -- Minimal microkernel -- No drivers in kernel space -- Capability-based IPC -- Immutable kernel image - ---- - -## 4. Development Constraints - -- Programming language: Rust -- Unsafe Rust prohibited unless justified -- All code must trace to requirements -- All requirements must be verified - ---- - -## 5. Verification Philosophy - -Verification is performed through: -- Requirements-based testing -- Formal verification (where applicable) -- Static analysis -- Manual code review diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/traceability-matrix.csv b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/traceability-matrix.csv deleted file mode 100644 index e51ad4667..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/traceability-matrix.csv +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9 +0,0 @@ -HLR,LLR,Source File,Verification Method -HLR-001,LLR-001,kernel/memory.rs,Formal Proof + Test -HLR-002,LLR-002,kernel/mmu.rs,Static Analysis -HLR-003,LLR-005,kernel/scheduler.rs,Timing Analysis -HLR-004,LLR-004,kernel/ipc.rs,Unit Test -HLR-005,LLR-003,kernel/syscall.rs,Negative Testing -HLR-006,LLR-006,kernel/init.rs,Code Review -HLR-007,LLR-007,kernel/panic.rs,Fault Injection -HLR-008,LLR-008,ALL,Static Analysis diff --git a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/verification-plan.md b/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/verification-plan.md deleted file mode 100644 index c66a0ec89..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/governance/certification/do-178c/verification-plan.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,42 +0,0 @@ -# Software Verification Plan (SVP) -## DO-178C Level A - ---- - -## 1. Verification Objectives - -- Demonstrate correctness of implementation -- Show compliance with all requirements -- Detect unintended functionality - ---- - -## 2. Verification Methods - -- Requirements-based testing -- Code reviews -- Static analysis -- Formal methods (selective) - ---- - -## 3. Independence - -Verification activities shall be performed independently from development. - ---- - -## 4. Structural Coverage - -- Statement coverage: 100% -- Decision coverage: 100% -- MC/DC coverage: Required - ---- - -## 5. Verification Artifacts - -- Test cases -- Test procedures -- Test results -- Review records diff --git a/VantisOS/monitoring/alertmanager.yml b/VantisOS/monitoring/alertmanager.yml deleted file mode 100644 index 642a25747..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/monitoring/alertmanager.yml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ -# Alertmanager Configuration for VantisOS - -global: - resolve_timeout: 5m - slack_api_url: 'https://hooks.slack.com/services/YOUR/SLACK/WEBHOOK' - -route: - group_by: ['alertname', 'cluster', 'service'] - group_wait: 10s - group_interval: 10s - repeat_interval: 12h - receiver: 'default' - routes: - # Critical alerts go to PagerDuty - - match: - severity: critical - receiver: 'pagerduty' - continue: true - - # Warning alerts go to Slack - - match: - severity: warning - receiver: 'slack' - continue: true - - # All alerts go to email - - match: - severity: 'warning|critical' - receiver: 'email' - -receivers: - - name: 'default' - slack_configs: - - channel: '#vantisos-alerts' - send_resolved: true - title: '{{ .GroupLabels.alertname }}' - text: '{{ range .Alerts }}{{ .Annotations.description }}{{ end }}' - email_configs: - - to: 'alerts@vantisos.io' - send_resolved: true - subject: '[VantisOS Alert] {{ .GroupLabels.alertname }}' - body: '{{ range .Alerts }}{{ .Annotations.description }}{{ end }}' - - - name: 'pagerduty' - pagerduty_configs: - - service_key: 'YOUR_PAGERDUTY_SERVICE_KEY' - description: '{{ .GroupLabels.alertname }}' - severity: '{{ .CommonLabels.severity }}' - - - name: 'slack' - slack_configs: - - channel: '#vantisos-alerts' - send_resolved: true - title: '{{ .GroupLabels.alertname }}' - text: '{{ range .Alerts }}{{ .Annotations.description }}{{ end }}' - - - name: 'email' - email_configs: - - to: 'alerts@vantisos.io' - send_resolved: true - subject: '[VantisOS Alert] {{ .GroupLabels.alertname }}' - body: '{{ range .Alerts }}{{ .Annotations.description }}{{ end }}' - -inhibit_rules: - # Inhibit warning alerts if critical alert is firing - - source_match: - severity: 'critical' - target_match: - severity: 'warning' - equal: ['alertname', 'cluster', 'service'] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/monitoring/alerts/vantisos-alerts.yml b/VantisOS/monitoring/alerts/vantisos-alerts.yml deleted file mode 100644 index f021f0c45..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/monitoring/alerts/vantisos-alerts.yml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,153 +0,0 @@ -groups: - - name: vantisos_alerts - interval: 30s - rules: - # High CPU usage alert - - alert: HighCPUUsage - expr: rate(process_cpu_seconds_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) > 0.8 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "High CPU usage detected" - description: "VantisOS CPU usage is above 80% for 5 minutes" - - # Critical CPU usage alert - - alert: CriticalCPUUsage - expr: rate(process_cpu_seconds_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) > 0.95 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Critical CPU usage detected" - description: "VantisOS CPU usage is above 95% for 2 minutes" - - # High memory usage alert - - alert: HighMemoryUsage - expr: process_resident_memory_bytes{job="vantisos"} / 1024 / 1024 / 1024 > 8 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "High memory usage detected" - description: "VantisOS memory usage is above 8GB for 5 minutes" - - # Critical memory usage alert - - alert: CriticalMemoryUsage - expr: process_resident_memory_bytes{job="vantisos"} / 1024 / 1024 / 1024 > 12 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Critical memory usage detected" - description: "VantisOS memory usage is above 12GB for 2 minutes" - - # High IPC latency alert - - alert: HighIPCLatency - expr: histogram_quantile(0.99, rate(ipc_latency_seconds_bucket{job="vantisos"}[5m])) > 0.001 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "High IPC latency detected" - description: "99th percentile IPC latency is above 1ms for 5 minutes" - - # Critical IPC latency alert - - alert: CriticalIPCLatency - expr: histogram_quantile(0.99, rate(ipc_latency_seconds_bucket{job="vantisos"}[5m])) > 0.005 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Critical IPC latency detected" - description: "99th percentile IPC latency is above 5ms for 2 minutes" - - # High error rate alert - - alert: HighErrorRate - expr: rate(vantisos_errors_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) > 10 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "High error rate detected" - description: "VantisOS error rate is above 10 errors/second for 5 minutes" - - # Critical error rate alert - - alert: CriticalErrorRate - expr: rate(vantisos_errors_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) > 50 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Critical error rate detected" - description: "VantisOS error rate is above 50 errors/second for 2 minutes" - - # Service down alert - - alert: ServiceDown - expr: up{job="vantisos"} == 0 - for: 1m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "VantisOS service is down" - description: "VantisOS service has been down for 1 minute" - - # Disk space low alert - - alert: DiskSpaceLow - expr: (node_filesystem_avail_bytes{mountpoint="/"} / node_filesystem_size_bytes{mountpoint="/"}) < 0.1 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "Disk space low" - description: "Disk space is below 10% for 5 minutes" - - # Disk space critical alert - - alert: DiskSpaceCritical - expr: (node_filesystem_avail_bytes{mountpoint="/"} / node_filesystem_size_bytes{mountpoint="/"}) < 0.05 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Disk space critical" - description: "Disk space is below 5% for 2 minutes" - - # Database connection pool exhausted - - alert: DatabaseConnectionPoolExhausted - expr: pg_stat_activity_count / pg_settings_max_connections > 0.9 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "Database connection pool nearly exhausted" - description: "Database connection pool usage is above 90% for 5 minutes" - - # Database connection pool critical - - alert: DatabaseConnectionPoolCritical - expr: pg_stat_activity_count / pg_settings_max_connections > 0.95 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Database connection pool critical" - description: "Database connection pool usage is above 95% for 2 minutes" - - # Self-healing failures alert - - alert: SelfHealingFailures - expr: rate(self_healing_failures_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) > 1 - for: 5m - labels: - severity: warning - annotations: - summary: "Self-healing failures detected" - description: "Self-healing failure rate is above 1 failure/second for 5 minutes" - - # Self-healing critical failures alert - - alert: SelfHealingCriticalFailures - expr: rate(self_healing_failures_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) > 5 - for: 2m - labels: - severity: critical - annotations: - summary: "Critical self-healing failures detected" - description: "Self-healing failure rate is above 5 failures/second for 2 minutes" \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/monitoring/grafana-dashboard.json b/VantisOS/monitoring/grafana-dashboard.json deleted file mode 100644 index b37c58844..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/monitoring/grafana-dashboard.json +++ /dev/null @@ -1,192 +0,0 @@ -{ - "dashboard": { - "title": "VantisOS Monitoring Dashboard", - "uid": "vantisos-monitoring", - "tags": ["vantisos", "monitoring", "production"], - "timezone": "browser", - "refresh": "10s", - "panels": [ - { - "id": 1, - "title": "CPU Usage", - "type": "graph", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 0, "y": 0}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "rate(process_cpu_seconds_total{job="vantisos"}[5m]) * 100", - "legendFormat": "CPU Usage %" - } - ], - "yaxes": [ - { - "format": "percent", - "label": "CPU Usage" - } - ], - "alert": { - "conditions": [ - { - "evaluator": { - "params": [80], - "type": "gt" - }, - "operator": { - "type": "and" - } - } - ], - "executionErrorState": "alerting", - "frequency": "1m", - "handler": 1, - "name": "High CPU Usage", - "noDataState": "no_data", - "notifications": [] - } - }, - { - "id": 2, - "title": "Memory Usage", - "type": "graph", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 12, "y": 0}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "process_resident_memory_bytes{job="vantisos"} / 1024 / 1024 / 1024", - "legendFormat": "Memory Usage GB" - } - ], - "yaxes": [ - { - "format": "bytes", - "label": "Memory Usage" - } - ] - }, - { - "id": 3, - "title": "IPC Latency (99th percentile)", - "type": "graph", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 0, "y": 8}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "histogram_quantile(0.99, rate(ipc_latency_seconds_bucket{job="vantisos"}[5m])) * 1000", - "legendFormat": "99th Percentile (ms)" - } - ], - "yaxes": [ - { - "format": "ms", - "label": "Latency" - } - ] - }, - { - "id": 4, - "title": "Error Rate", - "type": "graph", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 12, "y": 8}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "rate(vantisos_errors_total{job="vantisos"}[5m])", - "legendFormat": "Errors/sec" - } - ], - "yaxes": [ - { - "format": "ops", - "label": "Error Rate" - } - ] - }, - { - "id": 5, - "title": "Request Rate", - "type": "graph", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 0, "y": 16}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "rate(vantisos_requests_total{job="vantisos"}[5m])", - "legendFormat": "Requests/sec" - } - ], - "yaxes": [ - { - "format": "ops", - "label": "Request Rate" - } - ] - }, - { - "id": 6, - "title": "Self-Healing Statistics", - "type": "stat", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 12, "y": 16}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "self_healing_failures_total{job="vantisos"}", - "legendFormat": "Total Failures" - }, - { - "expr": "self_healing_recoveries_total{job="vantisos"}", - "legendFormat": "Total Recoveries" - } - ], - "options": { - "colorMode": "value", - "graphMode": "area" - } - }, - { - "id": 7, - "title": "Database Connections", - "type": "graph", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 0, "y": 24}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "pg_stat_activity_count", - "legendFormat": "Active Connections" - }, - { - "expr": "pg_settings_max_connections", - "legendFormat": "Max Connections" - } - ], - "yaxes": [ - { - "format": "short", - "label": "Connections" - } - ] - }, - { - "id": 8, - "title": "Disk Usage", - "type": "gauge", - "gridPos": {"h": 8, "w": 12, "x": 12, "y": 24}, - "targets": [ - { - "expr": "(node_filesystem_avail_bytes{mountpoint="/"} / node_filesystem_size_bytes{mountpoint="/"}) * 100", - "legendFormat": "Disk Usage %" - } - ], - "options": { - "max": 100, - "min": 0, - "thresholds": [ - { - "color": "green", - "value": 0 - }, - { - "color": "yellow", - "value": 80 - }, - { - "color": "red", - "value": 90 - } - ] - } - } - ] - } -} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/monitoring/prometheus.yml b/VantisOS/monitoring/prometheus.yml deleted file mode 100644 index 6c6d2ec01..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/monitoring/prometheus.yml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,54 +0,0 @@ -# Prometheus Configuration for VantisOS - -global: - scrape_interval: 15s - evaluation_interval: 15s - external_labels: - cluster: 'vantisos-production' - environment: 'production' - -# Alertmanager configuration -alerting: - alertmanagers: - - static_configs: - - targets: - - 'alertmanager:9093' - -# Load rules once and periodically evaluate them -rule_files: - - 'alerts/*.yml' - -# Scrape configurations -scrape_configs: - # VantisOS metrics - - job_name: 'vantisos' - static_configs: - - targets: ['localhost:9090'] - metrics_path: '/metrics' - scrape_interval: 10s - scrape_timeout: 5s - - # Node exporter for system metrics - - job_name: 'node' - static_configs: - - targets: ['localhost:9100'] - - # cAdvisor for container metrics - - job_name: 'cadvisor' - static_configs: - - targets: ['localhost:8080'] - - # PostgreSQL metrics - - job_name: 'postgres' - static_configs: - - targets: ['localhost:9187'] - - # Redis metrics - - job_name: 'redis' - static_configs: - - targets: ['localhost:9121'] - - # ClickHouse metrics - - job_name: 'clickhouse' - static_configs: - - targets: ['localhost:9363'] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0000-template.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0000-template.md deleted file mode 100644 index 364a361ac..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0000-template.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,110 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-[Number]: [Title] - -## Status - -[Proposed | Accepted | Rejected | Deferred | Superseded by RFC-[Number]] - -## Author - -[Name] (@GitHub) - -## Created - -[YYYY-MM-DD] - -## Summary - -[Brief description of the RFC in 1-2 paragraphs] - -## Motivation - -[Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome?] - -## Detailed Design - -[Detailed technical description of the proposed change] - -### Use Cases - -[What are the use cases this RFC addresses?] - -### Changes - -[What changes are required?] - -### Alternatives - -[What are the alternative approaches?] - -## Drawbacks - -[What are the downsides or negative aspects of this proposal?] - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -[Why is this design the best in the space of possible designs? What other designs have been considered and what is the rationale for not choosing them?] - -## Prior Art - -[Discuss prior art, both within the VantisOS community and outside. What other projects have implemented this? How does this proposal differ?] - -## Unresolved Questions - -[What parts of the design are still TBD?] - -## Implementation Plan - -[What is the implementation plan? Include timeline, phases, and milestones] - -### Phase 1: [Phase Name] - -[Description] - -**Timeline**: [X weeks] - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] [Milestone 1] -- [ ] [Milestone 2] - -### Phase 2: [Phase Name] - -[Description] - -**Timeline**: [X weeks] - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] [Milestone 1] -- [ ] [Milestone 2] - -## Testing - -[How will this be tested?] - -## Risks and Mitigations - -[What are the risks and how will they be mitigated?] - -## Success Criteria - -[How will we know if this RFC is successful?] - -## Dependencies - -[What other RFCs or projects does this depend on?] - -## References - -- [Link to relevant documentation or discussion] -- [Link to issue or PR] - -## Appendix - -[Any additional information] - ---- - -**Discussion**: [Link to GitHub Discussion] -**Issue**: [Link to GitHub Issue] -**PR**: [Link to GitHub PR] - -**Last Updated**: [YYYY-MM-DD] \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0001-webassembly-primary-application-format.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0001-webassembly-primary-application-format.md deleted file mode 100644 index b3497b75f..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0001-webassembly-primary-application-format.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,273 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-0001: WebAssembly as Primary Application Format - -## Status - -Accepted - -## Author - -VantisOS Team (@vantisTeam) - -## Created - -2025-02-24 - -## Summary - -This RFC proposes using WebAssembly (WASM) as the primary application format for VantisOS. Applications will be distributed as .vnt files (WASM binaries) and run in a sandboxed WASM runtime. - -## Motivation - -VantisOS requires maximum security and formal verification. Traditional executable formats (ELF, PE) cannot guarantee security: - -- **No sandboxing**: Applications can access hardware directly -- **Memory safety**: Buffer overflows and use-after-free vulnerabilities -- **Verification**: Cannot verify applications before execution -- **Portability**: Binaries are architecture-specific - -WebAssembly provides: -- **Sandboxing**: Applications run in isolated sandbox -- **Deterministic execution**: Same input = same output -- **Formal verification**: WASM bytecode can be verified -- **Portability**: Write once, run on any architecture - -## Detailed Design - -### Architecture - -``` -Application (WASM .vnt) - ↓ -VantisOS WASM Runtime - ↓ -System Calls (via capability-based IPC) - ↓ -Kernel -``` - -### WASM Runtime Features - -1. **Sandboxed execution**: Applications run in isolated WASM sandbox -2. **Native IPC**: Integration with VantisOS capability-based IPC -3. **No browser overhead**: Optimized for OS applications -4. **System call interface**: Safe syscall ABI for OS access -5. **AOT compilation**: Ahead-of-time compilation for performance -6. **Streaming compilation**: Compile while loading for fast startup - -### Application Development - -**Supported Languages**: -- Rust (primary) -- C/C++ -- AssemblyScript -- Any language that compiles to WASM - -**Development Workflow**: -1. Write application in supported language -2. Compile to WASM -3. Package as .vnt (WASM + metadata) -4. Deploy to VantisOS -5. Application runs safely in sandbox - -### Security Properties - -- **Memory safety**: WASM prevents buffer overflows -- **Type safety**: WASM enforces type safety -- **Sandbox isolation**: Applications cannot access hardware -- **Capability-based access**: System access via capabilities -- **Verification**: Can verify bytecode before execution - -### Performance - -**Optimizations**: -- AOT compilation (compile to native code) -- Streaming compilation (compile while loading) -- JIT compilation for hot paths -- Zero-copy IPC with kernel -- SIMD and multi-threading support - -**Expected Performance**: -- Startup: < 100ms (streaming AOT) -- Execution: 80-90% of native performance -- Memory: 2-3x overhead (sandbox) - -### Compatibility - -**Format**: `.vnt` = WASM binary + VantisOS metadata - -**Metadata includes**: -- Application manifest -- Required capabilities -- Version information -- Dependencies - -## Drawbacks - -1. **Performance overhead**: WASM has overhead vs native code -2. **Development overhead**: Requires WASM toolchain -3. **Library support**: Not all libraries support WASM -4. **Debugging**: WASM debugging is harder than native -5. **Legacy apps**: Existing apps must be recompiled - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -### Why WASM over other options? - -**Alternative 1: Native Machine Code** -- **Pros**: Maximum performance, no overhead -- **Cons**: No safety, cannot sandbox, cannot verify -- **Rejected**: Security is non-negotiable - -**Alternative 2: ELF with Sandboxing** -- **Pros**: Native performance, familiar -- **Cons**: Hard to sandbox securely, complex -- **Rejected**: WASM provides better safety - -**Alternative 3: Java/JVM** -- **Pros**: Mature, portable -- **Cons**: Garbage collector, slower startup -- **Rejected**: WASM is more modern and flexible - -**Alternative 4: Lua/Python Scripts** -- **Pros**: Easy to write -- **Cons**: Too slow, no type safety -- **Rejected**: Performance critical for OS - -## Prior Art - -- **WebAssembly**: Web standard for sandboxed code -- **Wasmtime**: Standalone WASM runtime -- **WAVM**: High-performance WASM VM -- **Linux with WASM**: Some Linux distributions experimenting with WASM -- **Fuchsia OS**: Uses component-based model (similar concepts) - -## Unresolved Questions - -None - design is complete and ready for implementation. - -## Implementation Plan - -### Phase 1: WASM Runtime Core (4 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 1-4 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] WASM parser and validator -- [ ] Basic runtime with AOT compilation -- [ ] Sandbox isolation -- [ ] System call interface - -### Phase 2: IPC Integration (2 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 5-6 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Capability-based IPC integration -- [ ] Zero-copy message passing -- [ ] Async/sync system calls - -### Phase 3: Performance Optimization (3 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 7-9 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Streaming AOT compilation -- [ ] JIT for hot paths -- [ ] SIMD and multi-threading - -### Phase 4: Tooling (2 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 10-11 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] .vnt packaging tool -- [ ] Development toolchain -- [ ] Debugging tools - -### Phase 5: Testing (2 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 12-13 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Unit tests -- [ ] Integration tests -- [ ] Performance benchmarks - -**Total**: 13 weeks - -## Testing - -1. **Unit tests**: Test each component -2. **Integration tests**: Test WASM runtime with kernel -3. **Performance tests**: Benchmark against native -4. **Security tests**: Verify sandbox isolation -5. **Formal verification**: Verify critical properties - -## Risks and Mitigations - -### Risk 1: Performance overhead too high - -**Mitigation**: AOT compilation, JIT, zero-copy IPC - -### Risk 2: Library support insufficient - -**Mitigation**: Prioritize Rust ecosystem, provide native libraries - -### Risk 3: Debugging difficulty - -**Mitigation**: Good debugging tools, native-like debugging experience - -### Risk 4: Developer adoption - -**Mitigation**: Excellent documentation, tooling, examples - -## Success Criteria - -- [ ] WASM runtime performance: ≥ 80% of native -- [ ] Security: No sandbox escapes in testing -- [ ] Formal verification: Key properties verified -- [ ] Developer adoption: 10+ apps in first month -- [ ] Bug count: < 5 critical bugs in first year - -## Dependencies - -- **ADR-0001**: Use Rust as primary language -- **ADR-0002**: Adopt microkernel architecture -- **ADR-0004**: Capability-based IPC system - -## References - -- [WebAssembly Specification](https://webassembly.github.io/spec/) -- [Wasmtime Runtime](https://wasmtime.dev/) -- [WAVM](https://github.com/wavm/wavm) -- [ADR-0008: WebAssembly as Primary Application Format](../adr/0008-webassembly-primary-application-format.md) - -## Appendix - -### Example Application - -```rust -// hello.vnt -fn main() { - print!("Hello, VantisOS!"); -} -``` - -**Compile**: -```bash -rustc --target wasm32-unknown-unknown -o hello.wasm hello.rs -vantis-package hello.wasm -o hello.vnt -``` - -**Run**: -```bash -vantis-run hello.vnt -``` - ---- - -**Discussion**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/discussions/1 -**Issue**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/issues/1 -**PR**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/pull/1 - -**Last Updated**: 2025-02-24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0002-legacy-airlock-compatibility-subsystem.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0002-legacy-airlock-compatibility-subsystem.md deleted file mode 100644 index 79796259d..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0002-legacy-airlock-compatibility-subsystem.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,321 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-0002: Legacy Airlock Compatibility Subsystem - -## Status - -Accepted - -## Author - -VantisOS Team (@vantisTeam) - -## Created - -2025-02-24 - -## Summary - -This RFC proposes the Legacy Airlock subsystem, a compatibility layer for running existing software on VantisOS. Legacy Airlock provides sandboxed execution of Linux ELF binaries, Windows PE executables, Android APKs, and other formats. - -## Motivation - -VantisOS rejects POSIX (RFC-0003) and uses WebAssembly (RFC-0001) for applications. However, for practical adoption, we need to run existing software: - -- **User adoption**: Users have existing software they want to run -- **Gradual migration**: Time to port software to WASM -- **Developer flexibility**: Not forced to port immediately -- **Ecosystem growth**: More software available - -## Detailed Design - -### Architecture - -``` -Legacy Application (ELF/PE/APK) - ↓ -Legacy Airlock (Compatibility Layer) - ↓ -Sandbox (Isolated) - ↓ -System Calls (Translation) - ↓ -Kernel -``` - -### Supported Formats - -**Priority 1: WebAssembly (.vnt)** -- Native VantisOS format -- Primary application format -- See RFC-0001 - -**Priority 2: Linux ELF Binaries** -- **Approach**: Containerization (like Docker but for binaries) -- **Sandbox**: Full OS-level sandbox -- **Syscall translation**: Translate Linux syscalls to VantisOS syscalls -- **Libraries**: Linux user-space libraries in container - -**Priority 3: Windows PE Executables** -- **Approach**: Translation layer (like Wine but for VantisOS) -- **API translation**: Win32 API → VantisOS APIs -- **DLL loading**: Load Windows DLLs in sandbox -- **DirectX**: Translate DirectX to Vulkan - -**Priority 4: Android APK** -- **Approach**: Runtime (Android Runtime for VantisOS) -- **Dalvik/ART**: Run Android bytecode -- **Android APIs**: Implement Android APIs on VantisOS -- **Apps**: Run Android applications - -### Security Model - -**Principles**: -1. **Sandboxed execution**: All legacy code runs in isolated sandbox -2. **Minimal compatibility**: Only essential APIs implemented -3. **No security compromises**: Legacy code cannot compromise VantisOS -4. **Performance overhead accepted**: Security > performance for legacy - -**Sandbox Isolation**: -- Process isolation -- File system isolation (chroot) -- Network isolation (optional) -- Resource limits (CPU, memory) -- Capability-based access control - -### API Translation - -**Linux → VantisOS**: -- File I/O: Linux file syscalls → VantisOS file syscalls -- IPC: Unix sockets → VantisOS capability-based IPC -- Networking: Linux network syscalls → VantisOS network stack -- Process management: Linux process syscalls → VantisOS process API - -**Windows → VantisOS**: -- Graphics: DirectX → Vulkan (VantisOS graphics) -- I/O: Win32 I/O → VantisOS I/O -- Threading: Windows threads → VantisOS threads -- Memory: Windows memory management → VantisOS memory - -**Android → VantisOS**: -- Graphics: Android graphics → VantisOS graphics -- I/O: Android I/O → VantisOS I/O -- Sensors: Android sensors → VantisOS drivers -- Apps: Android lifecycle → VantisOS process model - -### Performance - -**Expected Overhead**: -- Linux ELF: 10-20% overhead (containerization) -- Windows PE: 20-30% overhead (API translation) -- Android APK: 30-40% overhead (runtime) -- WebAssembly: 10-20% overhead (but primary format) - -**Optimizations**: -- AOT compilation for ELF/PE -- JIT for hot paths -- Caching of translated code -- Fast path for common operations - -## Drawbacks - -1. **Complexity**: Compatibility layer is complex to implement -2. **Performance**: Sandbox adds overhead -3. **Maintenance**: Must track Linux/Windows/Android API changes -4. **Security surface**: Larger attack surface from compatibility code -5. **Verification**: Harder to verify compatibility layer -6. **Dependency**: Dependent on external API specifications - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -### Why Legacy Airlock? - -**Alternative 1: No Compatibility (Pure VantisOS)** -- **Pros**: Simple, secure, clean architecture -- **Cons**: No existing software works -- **Rejected**: Adoption would be impossible - -**Alternative 2: Full Linux Kernel Module** -- **Pros**: Perfect Linux compatibility -- **Cons**: Compromises VantisOS security, complex -- **Rejected**: Defeats purpose of VantisOS - -**Alternative 3: Wine for Windows** -- **Pros**: Existing project, proven -- **Cons**: Too complex, Linux-specific -- **Rejected**: Want VantisOS-native solution - -**Alternative 4: Our own compatibility layer** -- **Pros**: Tailored to VantisOS, minimal APIs -- **Cons**: Development effort -- **Accepted**: Best balance of security and compatibility - -## Prior Art - -- **Wine**: Windows compatibility for Linux -- **Box86/Box64**: x86 emulation on ARM -- **FEX-Emu**: x86 emulation on ARM -- **Docker**: Containerization for Linux -- **WINE on macOS**: Windows apps on Mac - -## Unresolved Questions - -1. **How much of Linux/Windows/Android API to support?** - - **Initial**: Core APIs only (10-20%) - - **Goal**: Commonly used APIs (50-70%) - - **Full**: All APIs (unlikely) - -2. **How to handle missing APIs?** - - **Approach**: Graceful degradation, app fails gracefully - - **Documentation**: Clearly document supported APIs - -3. **How to prioritize formats?** - - **Decision**: WASM first, ELF second, PE third, APK last - -## Implementation Plan - -### Phase 1: Core Sandbox (4 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 1-4 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Sandbox framework -- [ ] Process isolation -- [ ] File system isolation -- [ ] Resource limits - -### Phase 2: Linux ELF Support (6 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 5-10 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] ELF loader -- [ ] Linux syscall translator -- [ ] Linux libraries in container -- [ ] Testing with common apps - -### Phase 3: Windows PE Support (8 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 11-18 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] PE loader -- [ ] Win32 API translator -- [ ] DirectX → Vulkan translator -- [ ] DLL loader -- [ ] Testing with common apps - -### Phase 4: Android APK Support (6 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 19-24 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] APK loader -- [ ] Android Runtime -- [ ] Android APIs implementation -- [ ] Testing with common apps - -### Phase 5: Testing and Optimization (4 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 25-28 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Comprehensive testing -- [ ] Performance optimization -- [ ] Security testing -- [ ] Documentation - -**Total**: 28 weeks - -## Testing - -1. **Unit tests**: Test each translator component -2. **Integration tests**: Test legacy apps in sandbox -3. **Security tests**: Verify sandbox isolation -4. **Performance tests**: Benchmark overhead -5. **Compatibility tests**: Test with real applications - -## Risks and Mitigations - -### Risk 1: Complexity explosion - -**Mitigation**: Start with minimal APIs, incremental approach - -### Risk 2: Performance overhead too high - -**Mitigation**: AOT compilation, caching, fast paths - -### Risk 3: Security vulnerabilities in compatibility layer - -**Mitigation**: Formal verification of core, fuzzing, security review - -### Risk 4: Maintenance burden - -**Mitigation**: Limit supported APIs, clear deprecation policy - -## Success Criteria - -- [ ] Linux ELF: Run 50+ common applications -- [ ] Windows PE: Run 20+ common applications -- [ ] Android APK: Run 10+ common applications -- [ ] Security: No sandbox escapes in testing -- [ ] Performance: < 30% overhead for most apps - -## Dependencies - -- **ADR-0002**: Adopt microkernel architecture (enables isolation) -- **ADR-0008**: WebAssembly as primary application format (native format) -- **RFC-0001**: WebAssembly as Primary Application Format -- **RFC-0003**: Reject POSIX Compliance - -## References - -- [Wine Compatibility Layer](https://www.winehq.org/) -- [Box86/Box64](https://github.com/ptitSeb/box64) -- [FEX-Emu](https://github.com/FEX-Emu/FEX) -- [Docker](https://www.docker.com/) -- [ADR-0007: Legacy Airlock for Compatibility](../adr/0007-legacy-airlock-compatibility.md) - -## Appendix - -### Example Usage - -**Run Linux ELF**: -```bash -legacy-run --format elf myapp -``` - -**Run Windows PE**: -```bash -legacy-run --format pe myapp.exe -``` - -**Run Android APK**: -```bash -legacy-run --format apk myapp.apk -``` - -### Supported Applications (Planned) - -**Linux**: -- Shell tools (bash, coreutils) -- Editors (vim, nano) -- Development tools (git, make) -- Browsers (Firefox, Chrome) - -**Windows**: -- Notepad -- Calculator -- Simple games -- Utilities - -**Android**: -- Simple apps -- Utilities -- (Complex apps later) - ---- - -**Discussion**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/discussions/2 -**Issue**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/issues/2 -**PR**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/pull/2 - -**Last Updated**: 2025-02-24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0003-reject-posix-compliance.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0003-reject-posix-compliance.md deleted file mode 100644 index cb4f670a3..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0003-reject-posix-compliance.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,316 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-0003: Reject POSIX Compliance - -## Status - -Accepted - -## Author - -VantisOS Team (@vantisTeam) - -## Created - -2025-02-24 - -## Summary - -This RFC proposes that VantisOS consciously reject POSIX compliance. VantisOS will not be POSIX-compliant and will implement custom APIs that prioritize security, formal verification, and innovation over compatibility with Unix-like systems. - -## Motivation - -POSIX (Portable Operating System Interface) is a standard from the 1970s that: -- Enforces compatibility with Unix-like systems -- Includes many obsolete design decisions -- Prioritizes compatibility over security -- Contains design flaws that cannot be formally verified - -**Problems with POSIX**: - -1. **Insecure APIs**: - - Signals: Asynchronous, no context, race conditions - - Shared memory: No bounds checking, data races - - Pipes/queues: No access control, any process can write - -2. **Impossible to verify**: - - Undefined behavior is rampant - - Many APIs have race conditions - - Memory safety is not guaranteed - -3. **Inhibits innovation**: - - Forces old design patterns - - Prevents new approaches - - Maintains legacy debt - -4. **VantisOS requirements**: - - Formal verification: All APIs must be verifiable - - Security: No insecure abstractions - - Innovation: Freedom to design optimal solutions - -## Detailed Design - -### Decision: Full POSIX Rejection - -VantisOS will **NOT** implement POSIX-compliant APIs. - -### Custom APIs - -**System Call Interface**: -- Custom syscall ABI -- Memory-safe parameters -- Capability-based access control -- No undefined behavior - -**File System (VantisFS)**: -- Custom file system semantics -- No Unix file permissions (use capabilities) -- Modern file system features - -**IPC System**: -- Custom capability-based IPC -- No Unix pipes or message queues -- End-to-end encryption - -**Process Model**: -- No Unix signals or fork -- Modern process management -- Capability-based isolation - -**Standard Library**: -- Custom Vantis stdlib -- No POSIX stdlib -- Memory-safe APIs - -### Benefits of POSIX Rejection - -**Security**: -- No insecure POSIX abstractions -- All APIs can be formally verified -- Capability-based security model - -**Formal Verification**: -- All APIs can be verified -- No undefined behavior -- Proven security properties - -**Innovation**: -- Freedom to design optimal solutions -- No legacy constraints -- Modern design patterns - -**Simplicity**: -- No compatibility layers -- No legacy debt -- Cleaner architecture - -### Challenges of POSIX Rejection - -**No compatibility**: -- No POSIX applications work natively -- Requires Legacy Airlock (RFC-0002) for compatibility -- Porting required for all software - -**Developer friction**: -- Developers must learn new APIs -- Existing experience doesn't transfer -- Learning curve - -**Ecosystem impact**: -- Smaller initial ecosystem -- Must build from scratch -- Slower initial adoption - -## Drawbacks - -1. **No compatibility**: Cannot run POSIX applications natively -2. **Porting required**: All software must be ported or rewritten -3. **Developer friction**: Developers must learn new APIs -4. **Limited ecosystem**: No existing software works out-of-the-box -5. **Community resistance**: Some users expect POSIX compliance -6. **Legacy Airlock required**: Need compatibility layer (adds complexity) - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -### Why Full Rejection? - -**Alternative 1: Full POSIX Compliance** -- **Pros**: Maximum compatibility, existing software works -- **Cons**: Insecure, impossible to verify, forces bad design -- **Rejected**: Security and formal verification are non-negotiable - -**Alternative 2: Partial POSIX Compatibility (Linux-style)** -- **Pros**: Some compatibility, still mostly custom -- **Cons**: Still inherits POSIX design flaws, verification harder -- **Rejected**: Partial POSIX still compromises security - -**Alternative 3: POSIX Compatibility Layer** -- **Pros**: Can run POSIX apps via emulation -- **Cons**: Complexity overhead, still need to implement POSIX -- **Rejected**: Waste of development effort - -**Alternative 4: Full Rejection** -- **Pros**: Clean slate, security, verifiable -- **Cons**: No compatibility -- **Accepted**: Security and verification are non-negotiable - -### Justification - -**Security is non-negotiable**: POSIX has inherent design flaws that cannot be fixed. - -**Formal verification is required**: Many POSIX APIs are impossible to verify. - -**Innovation is priority**: We want to design optimal solutions, not carry 50 years of legacy. - -**Compatibility via Legacy Airlock**: We can run POSIX apps via Legacy Airlock (RFC-0002) without compromising VantisOS. - -## Prior Art - -- **seL4**: Not POSIX-compliant, focuses on security -- **MINIX 3**: POSIX-like but not compliant -- **Plan 9**: Different design, not POSIX -- **The POSIX Horror Show**: Documentation of POSIX problems -- [POSIX: Why It's Time to Move On](https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3031035) - -## Unresolved Questions - -None - decision is clear and final. - -## Implementation Plan - -### Phase 1: Custom System Call Interface (4 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 1-4 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Custom syscall ABI -- [ ] Memory-safe parameter validation -- [ ] Capability-based access control -- [ ] Documentation - -### Phase 2: Custom IPC (3 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 5-7 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Capability-based IPC -- [ ] End-to-end encryption -- [ ] No POSIX pipes/queues -- [ ] Documentation - -### Phase 3: Custom File System (6 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 8-13 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] VantisFS design -- [ ] Custom file system semantics -- [ ] No Unix permissions -- [ ] Documentation - -### Phase 4: Custom Process Model (3 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 14-16 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Modern process management -- [ ] No Unix signals/fork -- [ ] Documentation - -### Phase 5: Custom Standard Library (6 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 17-22 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Vantis stdlib design -- [ ] No POSIX stdlib -- [ ] Memory-safe APIs -- [ ] Documentation - -**Total**: 22 weeks - -## Testing - -1. **Unit tests**: Test each custom API -2. **Integration tests**: Test APIs together -3. **Formal verification**: Verify critical properties -4. **Security tests**: Verify no security issues -5. **Performance tests**: Benchmark vs POSIX - -## Risks and Mitigations - -### Risk 1: Developer adoption - -**Mitigation**: Excellent documentation, examples, tools - -### Risk 2: Ecosystem growth - -**Mitigation**: Legacy Airlock (RFC-0002), community building - -### Risk 3: Porting effort - -**Mitigation**: Provide migration guides, tools, support - -### Risk 4: Community resistance - -**Mitigation**: Clear communication, benefits explained - -## Success Criteria - -- [ ] All custom APIs implemented -- [ ] All APIs formally verified -- [ ] Documentation complete -- [ ] No POSIX dependencies -- [ ] Community adoption: 50+ developers in first year - -## Dependencies - -- **ADR-0001**: Use Rust as primary language -- **ADR-0002**: Adopt microkernel architecture -- **ADR-0004**: Capability-based IPC system -- **RFC-0002**: Legacy Airlock Compatibility Subsystem - -## References - -- [POSIX Specification](https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/) -- [The POSIX Horror Show](https://github.com/rust-osdev/posix-nomicon) -- [POSIX: Why It's Time to Move On](https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=3031035) -- [VantisOS MANIFEST.md](MANIFEST.md) - POSIX Rejection principle -- [POSIX Debloading Progress Report](../docs/reports/POSIX_DEBLOADING_PROGRESS_REPORT_FEB_22_2025.md) - -## Appendix - -### Examples of POSIX vs VantisOS - -**POSIX signal** (insecure): -```c -// POSIX: Asynchronous, no context -signal(SIGINT, handler); // Can happen at any time -``` - -**VantisOS capability** (secure): -```rust -// VantisOS: Capability-based, explicit -let cap = process::request_capability("terminate"); -// Receiver must explicitly accept -``` - -**POSIX shared memory** (insecure): -```c -// POSIX: No bounds checking -void *shm = shmat(shmid, NULL, 0); -// Any process can read/write -``` - -**VantisOS shared memory** (secure): -```rust -// VantisOS: Capability-based -let shm = SharedMemory::new(capability)?; -// Only holders of capability can access -``` - ---- - -**Discussion**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/discussions/3 -**Issue**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/issues/3 -**PR**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/pull/3 - -**Last Updated**: 2025-02-24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0004-industry-compliance-certifications-roadmap.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0004-industry-compliance-certifications-roadmap.md deleted file mode 100644 index 31392ca20..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0004-industry-compliance-certifications-roadmap.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,383 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-0004: Industry Compliance Certifications Roadmap - -## Status - -Accepted - -## Author - -VantisOS Team (@vantisTeam) - -## Created - -2025-02-24 - -## Summary - -This RFC proposes a roadmap for pursuing industry compliance certifications including Common Criteria EAL7+, FIPS 140-3, ISO/IEC 27001, DO-178C, and ISO 26262. These certifications are required for high-security industries and provide independent verification of VantisOS security and reliability. - -## Motivation - -High-security industries require formal certifications: -- **Aviation**: DO-178C for safety-critical systems -- **Automotive**: ISO 26262 (ASIL D) for safety -- **Medical**: IEC 62304 for medical devices -- **Government**: Common Criteria EAL7+ for security -- **Finance**: PCI DSS for payment systems -- **Enterprise**: ISO/IEC 27001 for information security - -**VantisOS benefits**: -- **Trust**: Certifications provide independent verification -- **Markets**: Opens high-security industry markets -- **Customers**: Access to government, aviation, automotive, medical -- **Credibility**: Differentiates from competitors -- **Process**: Improves development process - -## Detailed Design - -### Target Certifications - -#### 1. Common Criteria EAL7+ (Highest Level) - -**Description**: Formal verification of security functionality - -**Scope**: -- Kernel components -- Security subsystems -- Formal verification artifacts - -**Timeline**: 18-24 months - -**Cost**: $100,000-200,000 - -**Target**: Security-critical systems, government use - -#### 2. FIPS 140-3 (Cryptographic Modules) - -**Description**: Validation of cryptographic implementations - -**Scope**: -- All cryptographic modules in VantisOS -- AES, RSA, ECC, SHA, RNG -- Key management - -**Timeline**: 12-18 months - -**Cost**: $50,000-100,000 - -**Target**: All cryptographic operations - -#### 3. ISO/IEC 27001 (Information Security Management) - -**Description**: Information security management system - -**Scope**: -- Development processes -- Security policies -- Risk management - -**Timeline**: 6-12 months - -**Cost**: $30,000-50,000 - -**Target**: Enterprise deployment - -#### 4. DO-178C (Aviation Software) - -**Description**: Safety-critical software development - -**Scope**: -- Safety-critical components -- Formal verification and testing -- Traceability matrix - -**Timeline**: 24-36 months - -**Cost**: $150,000-250,000 - -**Target**: Aviation industry - -#### 5. ISO 26262 ASIL D (Automotive Safety) - -**Description**: Functional safety for automotive systems - -**Scope**: -- Automotive-specific components -- Safety requirements and verification -- Functional safety - -**Timeline**: 24-36 months - -**Cost**: $150,000-250,000 - -**Target**: Automotive industry - -### Certification Strategy - -**Phased approach**: -1. **Phase 1**: ISO/IEC 27001 (easiest, establishes foundation) -2. **Phase 2**: FIPS 140-3 (crypto validation) -3. **Phase 3**: Common Criteria EAL7+ (main security certification) -4. **Phase 4**: Industry-specific (DO-178C, ISO 26262) - -**Lab partnerships**: -- Partner with accredited certification labs -- Use multiple labs for different certifications -- Long-term relationships for recertification - -**Evidence collection**: -- Collect evidence throughout development -- Maintain traceability matrix -- Document all decisions and processes - -**Independent review**: -- Third-party audits and reviews -- Penetration testing -- Formal verification reviews - -**Continuous compliance**: -- Maintain compliance post-certification -- Regular audits and reviews -- Update processes as needed - -### Resources Required - -**Time**: 1-3 years per certification -**Budget**: $50,000-250,000 per certification -**Team**: 2-3 dedicated compliance engineers -**Evidence**: Formal proofs, tests, documentation - -### Compliance Team - -**Roles**: -- **Compliance Manager**: Overall certification strategy -- **Security Engineer**: Evidence collection, security review -- **Documentation Engineer**: Traceability, documentation -- **Liaison**: Lab communication, audit coordination - -**Responsibilities**: -- Certification planning and execution -- Evidence collection and management -- Lab coordination -- Audit preparation -- Process improvement - -## Drawbacks - -1. **Time**: Certifications take 1-3 years -2. **Cost**: Significant cost for each certification ($50,000-250,000) -3. **Complexity**: Complex evidence collection and documentation -4. **Flexibility**: Certification constraints on development -5. **Maintenance**: Must maintain compliance -6. **Team distraction**: Takes focus from development - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -### Why pursue certifications? - -**Alternative 1: No Certifications** -- **Pros**: No overhead, no cost -- **Cons**: Cannot sell to high-security industries -- **Rejected**: Certifications are market requirement - -**Alternative 2: Partial Certifications** -- **Pros**: Less cost and time -- **Cons**: Limited market access -- **Rejected**: Want full compliance for key markets - -**Alternative 3: Self-Certification** -- **Pros**: No external cost -- **Cons**: Not recognized by industries -- **Rejected**: Want recognized certifications - -**Alternative 4: Delayed Certification** -- **Pros**: Focus on development first -- **Cons**: Delays market entry -- **Rejected**: Certification should be integrated from start - -**Accepted**: Pursue certifications from start with phased approach - -### Justification - -**Market requirement**: High-security industries require certifications - -**Competitive advantage**: Few OS have EAL7+ certification - -**Process improvement**: Certifications improve development process - -**Credibility**: Independent verification of claims - -**Customer demand**: Government, aviation, automotive customers demand certification - -## Prior Art - -- **seL4**: Common Criteria EAL7+ certified -- **QNX**: Multiple certifications (automotive, medical) -- **VxWorks**: Multiple certifications (aviation, automotive) -- **Linux**: Some certifications but limited - -## Unresolved Questions - -1. **Which certification first?** - - **Decision**: ISO/IEC 27001 first (easiest, establishes foundation) - -2. **How many resources to dedicate?** - - **Decision**: Start with 1 compliance engineer, scale to 3 - -3. **Which labs to partner with?** - - **Decision**: Evaluate multiple labs, choose based on expertise - -## Implementation Plan - -### Phase 1: Foundation (3 months) - -**Timeline**: Months 1-3 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Hire compliance manager -- [ ] Choose certification labs -- [ ] Establish compliance framework -- [ ] Start ISO/IEC 27001 preparation - -### Phase 2: ISO/IEC 27001 Certification (9 months) - -**Timeline**: Months 4-12 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Implement ISO/IEC 27001 processes -- [ ] Collect evidence -- [ ] Pre-assessment -- [ ] Certification audit -- [ ] Achieve certification - -### Phase 3: FIPS 140-3 Certification (12 months) - -**Timeline**: Months 6-18 (overlap) - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Implement crypto validation -- [ ] Lab testing -- [ ] Validation audit -- [ ] Achieve certification - -### Phase 4: Common Criteria EAL7+ (24 months) - -**Timeline**: Months 12-36 (overlap) - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Security target (ST) preparation -- [ ] Evidence collection -- [ ] Formal verification -- [ ] Lab testing -- [ ] Certification audit -- [ ] Achieve certification - -### Phase 5: Industry-Specific (36 months) - -**Timeline**: Months 24-60 (overlap) - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] DO-178C certification -- [ ] ISO 26262 certification -- [ ] IEC 62304 certification -- [ ] PCI DSS certification - -**Total**: 5 years for all certifications - -## Testing - -1. **Formal verification**: All components verified -2. **Security testing**: Penetration testing, fuzzing -3. **Compliance testing**: Lab testing for each certification -4. **Audit testing**: Audit readiness assessments -5. **Process testing**: Process compliance verification - -## Risks and Mitigations - -### Risk 1: Cost overrun - -**Mitigation**: Phased approach, start with ISO/IEC 27001 - -### Risk 2: Time overrun - -**Mitigation**: Parallel certifications, dedicated team - -### Risk 3: Lab issues - -**Mitigation**: Multiple lab partnerships, backup plans - -### Risk 4: Evidence gaps - -**Mitigation**: Continuous evidence collection, traceability - -### Risk 5: Team distraction - -**Mitigation**: Dedicated compliance team, minimize impact - -## Success Criteria - -- [ ] ISO/IEC 27001: Certified within 12 months -- [ ] FIPS 140-3: Certified within 18 months -- [ ] Common Criteria EAL7+: Certified within 36 months -- [ ] DO-178C: Certified within 48 months -- [ ] ISO 26262: Certified within 48 months - -## Dependencies - -- **ADR-0005**: Formal verification with Verus/Kani -- **ADR-0014**: Fuzzing-First Security Development -- **ADR-0017**: Docs-as-Code Documentation System -- **RFC-0005**: Development Process for Formal Verification - -## References - -- [Common Criteria](https://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/) -- [FIPS 140-3](https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/fips/140/3/final) -- [ISO/IEC 27001](https://www.iso.org/standard/27001) -- [DO-178C](https://www.rtcavs.com/products/rtca-do-178c) -- [ISO 26262](https://www.iso.org/standard/26262) -- [ADR-0020: Industry Compliance Certifications](../adr/0020-industry-compliance-certifications.md) - -## Appendix - -### Certification Timeline - -``` -Year 1: -- Q1: Foundation -- Q2: ISO/IEC 27001 -- Q3: ISO/IEC 27001 -- Q4: ISO/IEC 27001 certification - -Year 2: -- Q1: FIPS 140-3 -- Q2: FIPS 140-3 -- Q3: FIPS 140-3 -- Q4: Common Criteria EAL7+ start - -Year 3: -- Q1: Common Criteria EAL7+ -- Q2: Common Criteria EAL7+ -- Q3: Common Criteria EAL7+ -- Q4: Common Criteria EAL7+ certification - -Year 4: -- Q1: DO-178C -- Q2: DO-178C -- Q3: ISO 26262 -- Q4: ISO 26262 - -Year 5: -- Q1: DO-178C certification -- Q2: ISO 26262 certification -- Q3: Maintenance -- Q4: Maintenance -``` - ---- - -**Discussion**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/discussions/4 -**Issue**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/issues/4 -**PR**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/pull/4 - -**Last Updated**: 2025-02-24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0006-ai-powered-code-review-vantis-guard.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0006-ai-powered-code-review-vantis-guard.md deleted file mode 100644 index 536a1e873..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0006-ai-powered-code-review-vantis-guard.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,378 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-0006: AI-Powered Code Review - Vantis Guard - -## Status - -Accepted - -## Author - -VantisOS Team (@vantisTeam) - -## Created - -2025-02-24 - -## Summary - -This RFC proposes Vantis Guard, an AI-powered code review system that uses large language models to review code for security issues, bugs, and best practice violations before human review. Vantis Guard reduces the burden on human reviewers and catches issues that might be missed. - -## Motivation - -Traditional code review: -- **Manual**: Human reviewers must manually review all code -- **Scalability**: Doesn't scale with large teams and many PRs -- **Consistency**: Different reviewers catch different things -- **Time**: Takes significant time to review thoroughly - -VantisOS requirements: -- **Security first**: Must catch security issues -- **Formal verification**: Code must be verifiable -- **Consistency**: Consistent reviews across all PRs -- **Efficiency**: Scale with team size and PR volume - -## Detailed Design - -### Vantis Guard Architecture - -``` -Pull Request - ↓ -Vantis Guard (AI Review) - ↓ -Analysis - ↓ -Report (Security, Bugs, Best Practices) - ↓ -Human Review - ↓ -Merge -``` - -### AI Model - -**Model**: Custom fine-tuned LLM for VantisOS code review - -**Training**: -- Fine-tuned on VantisOS codebase -- Trained on security vulnerabilities -- Trained on formal verification patterns -- Trained on Rust best practices - -**Capabilities**: -- Security vulnerability detection -- Bug detection -- Formal verification guidance -- Best practice violations -- Code style consistency - -### Review Categories - -#### 1. Security Review - -**Checks**: -- Buffer overflow vulnerabilities -- Use-after-free issues -- Data race detection -- Cryptographic issues -- Authentication/authorization flaws -- Injection attacks -- Memory safety issues - -**Severity**: Critical, High, Medium, Low - -#### 2. Bug Detection - -**Checks**: -- Logic errors -- Edge cases -- Null/None handling -- Resource leaks -- Deadlock potential -- Race conditions -- Performance issues - -#### 3. Formal Verification Review - -**Checks**: -- Verifiability assessment -- Proof suggestions -- Invariant suggestions -- Specification completeness -- Proof complexity - -#### 4. Best Practices - -**Checks**: -- Rust idioms -- Code organization -- Documentation -- Testing coverage -- Error handling -- Performance patterns - -### Integration with GitHub - -**Automated Review**: -- Triggered on every PR -- Runs in GitHub Actions -- Posts review comments -- Blocks merge if critical issues found - -**Review Format**: -```markdown -## Vantis Guard Review - -### Security Issues (1) -- [Critical] Potential buffer overflow at line 42 - -### Bugs (2) -- [Medium] Possible null reference at line 78 -- [Low] Resource leak at line 120 - -### Formal Verification -- [Suggestion] Add Verus proof for function X - -### Best Practices -- [Info] Consider using Result instead of unwrap() -``` - -### Continuous Learning - -**Feedback Loop**: -- Human reviewers provide feedback on AI reviews -- False positives marked for improvement -- False negatives added to training data -- Model continuously retrained - -**Metrics**: -- False positive rate -- False negative rate -- Review time reduction -- Bug catch rate - -## Drawbacks - -1. **Cost**: LLM inference has cost -2. **False positives**: AI may flag non-issues -3. **False negatives**: AI may miss issues -4. **Training time**: Model requires training and tuning -5. **Privacy**: Code sent to AI service (can be self-hosted) -6. **Trust**: Developers may not trust AI reviews - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -### Why AI-Powered Review? - -**Alternative 1: Manual Review Only** -- **Pros**: Human judgment, no AI issues -- **Cons**: Doesn't scale, inconsistent -- **Rejected**: Need to scale with team size - -**Alternative 2: Static Analysis Only** -- **Pros**: Fast, no AI, consistent -- **Cons**: Limited to static patterns -- **Rejected**: AI can catch more complex issues - -**Alternative 3: Third-Party AI Service** -- **Pros**: No setup, proven solutions -- **Cons**: External dependency, privacy concerns -- **Rejected**: Want control and customization - -**Accepted**: Custom AI-powered review system - -### Justification - -**Scale with team**: AI can review unlimited PRs - -**Consistency**: AI provides consistent reviews - -**Security focus**: AI trained on security vulnerabilities - -**Human augment**: AI assists human reviewers, not replaces - -**Continuous improvement**: Model learns from feedback - -## Prior Art - -- **GitHub Copilot**: AI code completion -- **CodeQL**: Static analysis -- **DeepCode**: AI code review -- **Facebook SapFix**: AI bug detection -- **Google's AI code review**: Internal tool - -## Unresolved Questions - -1. **Which LLM to use?** - - **Decision**: Evaluate options (LLaMA, GPT, Mistral) - -2. **Self-hosted or cloud?** - - **Decision**: Self-hosted for privacy - -3. **How to balance false positives?** - - **Decision**: Tune model, allow override - -## Implementation Plan - -### Phase 1: Model Selection (2 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 1-2 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Evaluate LLM options -- [ ] Select base model -- [ ] Gather training data -- [ ] Prepare dataset - -### Phase 2: Training (4 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 3-6 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Fine-tune model -- [ ] Evaluate performance -- [ ] Tune hyperparameters -- [ ] Validate results - -### Phase 3: GitHub Integration (3 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 7-9 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Develop GitHub Actions -- [ ] Design review format -- [ ] Integrate with PR workflow -- [ ] Test integration - -### Phase 4: Testing (2 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 10-11 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Test on historical PRs -- [ ] Measure false positive/negative rates -- [ ] Collect feedback -- [ ] Refine model - -### Phase 5: Rollout (2 weeks) - -**Timeline**: Weeks 12-13 - -**Milestones**: -- [ ] Gradual rollout -- [ ] Monitor performance -- [ ] Collect feedback -- [ ] Continuous improvement - -**Total**: 13 weeks - -## Testing - -1. **Model testing**: Evaluate model performance -2. **Integration testing**: Test GitHub integration -3. **Historical testing**: Test on historical PRs -4. **A/B testing**: Compare with manual review -5. **Continuous testing**: Monitor performance over time - -## Risks and Mitigations - -### Risk 1: False positives too high - -**Mitigation**: Tune model, allow human override - -### Risk 2: False negatives miss critical bugs - -**Mitigation**: Continuous training, feedback loop - -### Risk 3: Cost too high - -**Mitigation**: Self-hosted model, optimize inference - -### Risk 4: Developer resistance - -**Mitigation**: Transparency, explain decisions, allow override - -### Risk 5: Model drift - -**Mitigation**: Continuous retraining, monitor performance - -## Success Criteria - -- [ ] False positive rate < 20% -- [ ] False negative rate < 5% -- [ ] Review time reduction > 50% -- [ ] Bug catch rate > 80% -- [ ] Developer satisfaction > 70% - -## Dependencies - -- **ADR-0005**: Formal verification with Verus/Kani -- **RFC-0005**: Development Process for Formal Verification -- GitHub Actions integration - -## References - -- [GitHub Actions](https://github.com/features/actions) -- [Hugging Face Transformers](https://huggingface.co/docs/transformers) -- [Rust Analyzer](https://rust-analyzer.github.io/) - -## Appendix - -### Example Review Output - -```markdown -## Vantis Guard Review for #1234 - -### 🚨 Critical Issues (0) - -None found - -### ⚠️ High Issues (1) -- **Potential buffer overflow** at `src/ipc/channel.rs:42` - - The code doesn't check buffer bounds before writing - - Suggestion: Add bounds checking or use safe APIs - - Line: `unsafe { ptr.write(data) }` - -### 🐛 Bugs (2) -- **Possible null reference** at `src/memory/alloc.rs:78` - - `ptr` might be null if allocation fails - - Suggestion: Check for null before use - - Line: `*ptr = value;` - -- **Resource leak** at `src/file/handle.rs:120` - - File handle not closed on error path - - Suggestion: Use drop guard or ensure close in error path - - Line: `if error { return; }` - -### ✅ Formal Verification (1) -- **Suggestion**: Add Verus proof for `send_message` - - Function is security-critical - - Suggested proof: Prove message integrity - - Complexity: Medium - -### 💡 Best Practices (3) -- **Info**: Consider using `Result` instead of `unwrap()` - - Line 45, 67, 89 - -- **Info**: Add documentation for public API - - Function `send_message` lacks docs - -- **Info**: Consider using `const` where possible - - Variable `MAX_SIZE` could be `const` - -### 📊 Summary -- Critical: 0 -- High: 1 -- Medium: 2 -- Low: 0 -- Info: 3 - -**Status**: ⚠️ Review required (1 high issue found) -``` - ---- - -**Discussion**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/discussions/6 -**Issue**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/issues/6 -**PR**: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/pull/6 - -**Last Updated**: 2025-02-24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/0007-zero-trust-security-model.md b/VantisOS/rfc/0007-zero-trust-security-model.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0f3ce9aff..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/0007-zero-trust-security-model.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,231 +0,0 @@ -# RFC-0007: Zero-Trust Security Model - -## Status - -Accepted - -## Author - -VantisOS Team (@vantisTeam) - -## Created - -2025-02-24 - -## Summary - -This RFC proposes implementing a Zero-Trust security model for VantisOS. In a Zero-Trust model, no component is trusted by default, and all access is verified and authenticated continuously. This provides maximum security for a formally verified OS. - -## Motivation - -Traditional security models: -- **Perimeter-based**: Trust internal network, distrust external -- **Implicit trust**: Components inside are trusted -- **Single failure**: Breach of perimeter compromises everything - -VantisOS requirements: -- **Maximum security**: Verify all access, no implicit trust -- **Formal verification**: Security properties must be provable -- **Defense in depth**: Multiple layers of security -- **Compartmentalization**: Failures don't cascade - -## Detailed Design - -### Zero-Trust Principles - -1. **Never trust, always verify**: Verify every access request -2. **Least privilege**: Grant minimum necessary permissions -3. **Assume breach**: Design for compromise -4. **Continuous verification**: Verify continuously, not just once -5. **Explicit authorization**: All access requires explicit authorization - -### VantisOS Zero-Trust Architecture - -``` -Application - ↓ -Capability-Based IPC - ↓ -Security Sentinel - ↓ -Kernel -``` - -### Components - -#### 1. Capability-Based Authorization - -All access is granted via capabilities: -- Capabilities are unforgeable tokens -- Capabilities are transferable -- Capabilities are revocable -- Capabilities expire - -#### 2. Continuous Authentication - -Verify identity continuously: -- Mutual authentication (TLS-like) -- Periodic re-authentication -- Context-aware authentication -- Behavioral analysis - -#### 3. Real-Time Monitoring - -Monitor all access in real-time: -- Security Sentinel monitors all IPC -- Anomaly detection -- Threat intelligence -- Automated response - -#### 4. Micro-Segmentation - -Isolate all components: -- Microkernel architecture -- User-space services isolated -- Network segmentation -- Process isolation - -#### 5. Encryption Everywhere - -Encrypt all data in transit and at rest: -- End-to-end IPC encryption -- Full-disk encryption -- Vault encryption -- In-memory encryption - -### Access Control Model - -- **Default-Deny**: All access denied by default -- **Explicit-Allow**: Access granted only via capabilities -- **Least-Privilege**: Minimum necessary permissions -- **Just-In-Time**: Grant access only when needed -- **Time-Bounded**: Capabilities expire - -## Drawbacks - -1. **Complexity**: Zero-Trust adds complexity -2. **Performance**: Continuous verification has overhead -3. **Usability**: May impact user experience -4. **Implementation**: Requires careful design -5. **Testing**: Extensive testing required - -## Rationale and Alternatives - -### Why Zero-Trust? - -**Alternative 1: Perimeter-Based Security** -- **Pros**: Simple, familiar -- **Cons**: Breach compromises everything -- **Rejected**: Want maximum security - -**Alternative 2: Castle-and-Moat** -- **Pros**: Easy to understand -- **Cons**: Single point of failure -- **Rejected**: No single point of failure - -**Alternative 3: Partial Zero-Trust** -- **Pros**: Less complexity -- **Cons**: Not fully secure -- **Rejected**: Want full Zero-Trust - -**Accepted**: Full Zero-Trust model - -## Prior Art - -- **Google BeyondCorp**: Zero-Trust network access -- **Microsoft Zero Trust**: Zero-Trust security model -- **NIST Zero Trust**: Zero-Trust architecture - -## Unresolved Questions - -1. **How to balance security and performance?** - - **Decision**: Performance optimizations, selective verification - -2. **How to handle legacy apps?** - - **Decision**: Legacy Airlock with restricted access - -## Implementation Plan - -### Phase 1: Capability System (4 weeks) - -- [ ] Capability system design -- [ ] Capability issuance -- [ ] Capability validation -- [ ] Capability revocation - -### Phase 2: Continuous Authentication (3 weeks) - -- [ ] Mutual authentication -- [ ] Re-authentication -- [ ] Context-aware auth -- [ ] Behavioral analysis - -### Phase 3: Real-Time Monitoring (6 weeks) - -- [ ] Security Sentinel -- [ ] Anomaly detection -- [ ] Threat intelligence -- [ ] Automated response - -### Phase 4: Encryption Everywhere (4 weeks) - -- [ ] IPC encryption -- [ ] Full-disk encryption -- [ ] Vault encryption -- [ ] In-memory encryption - -### Phase 5: Testing and Verification (3 weeks) - -- [ ] Security testing -- [ ] Performance testing -- [ ] Formal verification -- [ ] Penetration testing - -**Total**: 20 weeks - -## Testing - -1. **Security testing**: Penetration testing, red team -2. **Performance testing**: Measure overhead -3. **Formal verification**: Verify Zero-Trust properties -4. **Integration testing**: Test all components -5. **Compliance testing**: Verify compliance with standards - -## Risks and Mitigations - -### Risk 1: Performance overhead -**Mitigation**: Optimization, selective verification - -### Risk 2: Complexity -**Mitigation**: Clear design, documentation - -### Risk 3: Usability -**Mitigation**: Good UX, transparent security - -### Risk 4: Implementation bugs -**Mitigation**: Formal verification, testing - -## Success Criteria - -- [ ] No implicit trust anywhere -- [ ] All access verified continuously -- [ ] Performance overhead < 15% -- [ ] Zero-Trust properties formally verified -- [ ] No security breaches in testing - -## Dependencies - -- **ADR-0002**: Adopt microkernel architecture -- **ADR-0004**: Capability-based IPC system -- **ADR-0009**: End-to-end encryption for IPC -- **ADR-0010**: Triple cascade encryption for Vault - -## References - -- [NIST Zero Trust Architecture](https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-207/final) -- [Google BeyondCorp](https://cloud.google.com/security/beyondcorp) -- [Microsoft Zero Trust](https://www.microsoft.com/security/zero-trust) - ---- - -**Last Updated**: 2025-02-24 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/rfc/RFC_PROCESS.md b/VantisOS/rfc/RFC_PROCESS.md deleted file mode 100644 index e527efcff..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/rfc/RFC_PROCESS.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,344 +0,0 @@ -# RFC (Request for Comments) Process - -## Overview - -The RFC (Request for Comments) process is how the VantisOS community makes major decisions about the project. RFCs are used for significant changes that affect the project's direction, architecture, or governance. - -## When to Use RFCs - -RFCs should be used for: - -**Major architectural changes**: -- New subsystems or components -- Breaking changes to existing APIs -- Changes to the kernel architecture - -**Governance changes**: -- Changes to decision-making processes -- New policies or procedures -- Changes to roles and responsibilities - -**Major features**: -- Features that require significant design work -- Features that affect multiple components -- Features that have alternatives worth considering - -**Partnerships and collaborations**: -- External partnerships -- Grant applications -- Funding proposals - -**When NOT to use RFCs**: -- Bug fixes (use PRs) -- Minor features (use PRs) -- Documentation updates (use PRs) -- Routine maintenance (use PRs) - -## RFC Process - -### Phase 1: Draft RFC - -1. **Create RFC**: Create a new RFC in `rfc/` directory -2. **Follow template**: Use `rfc/0000-template.md` as starting point -3. **Numbering**: Use next available number (e.g., RFC-0001) -4. **Submit PR**: Open PR with the RFC draft - -### Phase 2: TSC Review (7 days) - -1. **TSC review**: Technical Steering Committee reviews the RFC -2. **Initial feedback**: TSC provides initial feedback -3. **Revisions**: Author may revise RFC based on feedback -4. **Ready for discussion**: TSC marks RFC as "Ready for Discussion" - -### Phase 3: Community Discussion (30 days) - -1. **GitHub Discussion**: Create GitHub Discussion for RFC -2. **Community review**: Community reviews and discusses RFC -3. **Feedback collection**: Collect all feedback -4. **Revisions**: Author revises RFC based on community feedback - -### Phase 4: TSC Deliberation (14 days) - -1. **TSC deliberation**: TSC deliberates on RFC -2. **Decision**: TSC votes on RFC (requires 4/5 approval) -3. **Status update**: Update RFC status to Accepted/Rejected/Deferred - -### Phase 5: Implementation - -1. **Implementation planning**: Author creates implementation plan -2. **Tracking**: Track implementation in project management -3. **Completion**: Mark RFC as "Implemented" when complete - -### Phase 6: Post-Implementation Review - -1. **Retrospective**: Review implementation results -2. **Lessons learned**: Document lessons learned -3. **RFC update**: Update RFC with final results - -## RFC Template Structure - -```markdown -# RFC-[Number]: [Title] - -## Status -[Proposed | Accepted | Rejected | Deferred] - -## Author -[Name] (@GitHub) - -## Summary -[Brief description] - -## Motivation -[Why are we doing this?] - -## Detailed Design -[Technical details] - -## Drawbacks -[What are the downsides?] - -## Rationale and Alternatives -[Why this design? What alternatives?] - -## Prior Art -[What other projects?] - -## Unresolved Questions -[What is still TBD?] - -## Implementation Plan -[Timeline and phases] - -## Testing -[How will this be tested?] - -## Risks and Mitigations -[What are the risks?] - -## Success Criteria -[How will we know it's successful?] - -## Dependencies -[What does this depend on?] - -## References -[Links to relevant info] -``` - -## TSC Review Criteria - -The Technical Steering Committee evaluates RFCs based on: - -**Technical merit**: -- Does the RFC solve a real problem? -- Is the technical sound? -- Is it feasible to implement? - -**Alignment with project goals**: -- Does it align with VantisOS vision? -- Does it support formal verification goals? -- Does it maintain security standards? - -**Impact**: -- What is the impact on existing code? -- What is the impact on users? -- What is the impact on the community? - -**Alternatives**: -- Have alternatives been considered? -- Why is this the best approach? - -**Completeness**: -- Is the RFC complete? -- Are all questions answered? -- Is the implementation plan clear? - -## Community Review Guidelines - -Community members should review RFCs and provide feedback on: - -**Clarity**: -- Is the RFC clear and understandable? -- Are technical terms explained? - -**Feasibility**: -- Is the RFC feasible to implement? -- Are resources available? - -**Impact**: -- How will this affect you? -- What are the benefits and drawbacks? - -**Suggestions**: -- Do you have suggestions for improvement? -- Have you seen similar work elsewhere? - -**Be constructive**: Provide specific, actionable feedback - -## Decision Process - -### Acceptance - -RFCs are accepted if: - -1. **TSC approval**: 4/5 TSC members vote to approve -2. **Community support**: No major community objections -3. **Implementation resources**: Resources are available for implementation -4. **Clear plan**: Implementation plan is clear and achievable - -### Rejection - -RFCs may be rejected if: - -1. **TSC rejection**: 3+ TSC members vote to reject -2. **Community opposition**: Strong community opposition -3. **Misalignment**: Doesn't align with project goals -4. **Not feasible**: Cannot be implemented with available resources - -### Deferral - -RFCs may be deferred if: - -1. **Not ready now**: Good idea but not ready for implementation -2. **Requires more work**: Needs more research or design -3. **Timing**: Better timing in the future -4. **Dependencies**: Waiting on other RFCs or work - -### Superseding - -RFCs may be superseded if: - -1. **Newer RFC**: A newer RFC supersedes this one -2. **Updated approach**: Better approach is proposed - -## RFC Lifecycle - -``` -Draft → TSC Review → Community Discussion → TSC Decision → Implementation → Implemented - ↓ ↓ ↓ - Revision Revision Deferred -``` - -## Best Practices - -### For Authors - -**Before writing RFC**: -- Discuss idea in community first -- Get initial feedback -- Review similar RFCs - -**Writing RFC**: -- Be clear and concise -- Provide context and motivation -- Consider alternatives -- Include implementation plan - -**During review**: -- Respond to feedback promptly -- Be open to suggestions -- Update RFC based on feedback -- Be respectful of reviewers - -### For Reviewers - -**Reviewing RFCs**: -- Read the entire RFC carefully -- Provide specific feedback -- Be constructive -- Consider the bigger picture - -**During discussion**: -- Focus on technical merits -- Be respectful of authors -- Consider alternatives -- Help improve the RFC - -## RFC Examples - -### Example: RFC-0001 - Adopt Microkernel Architecture - -**Status**: Accepted - -**Summary**: Adopt microkernel architecture for VantisOS - -**Motivation**: Improve security, formal verification, fault isolation - -**Key Design**: Minimal kernel, user-space services, capability-based IPC - -**Result**: Implemented (see ADR-0002) - -### Example: RFC-0002 - Reject POSIX Compliance - -**Status**: Accepted - -**Summary**: Consciously reject POSIX compliance for VantisOS - -**Motivation**: POSIX has design flaws, limits innovation - -**Key Design**: Custom APIs, no compatibility layer - -**Result**: Implemented (see ADR-0003) - -## RFC Directory Structure - -``` -rfc/ -├── 0000-template.md -├── 0001-adopt-microkernel.md -├── 0002-reject-posix.md -├── 0003-webassembly-apps.md -├── RFC_PROCESS.md -└── README.md -``` - -## Tracking RFCs - -All RFCs are tracked in: - -1. **GitHub Discussions**: Each RFC has a discussion thread -2. **GitHub Issues**: RFCs are tracked as issues for implementation -3. **Project Management**: RFCs are tracked in project board -4. **README**: List of all RFCs with status - -## Updating RFCs - -RFCs can be updated: - -**During review**: Anytime during review process -**After acceptance**: Minor clarifications only -**Major changes**: New RFC required - -## RFC vs ADR - -**RFCs (Request for Comments)**: -- Used for major decisions -- Requires community review -- Future-looking (what should we do?) -- Status: Proposed/Accepted/Rejected - -**ADRs (Architecture Decision Records)**: -- Document decisions made -- Past-looking (what did we do?) -- No review required (already decided) -- Status: Accepted/Deprecated/Superseded - -**Relationship**: -- RFCs are proposed changes -- Accepted RFCs become ADRs -- ADRs record the final decision - -## Questions? - -For questions about the RFC process: - -- **Email**: governance@vantisos.org -- **GitHub Discussions**: #rfc channel -- **GitHub Issues**: Label with `rfc` - ---- - -**Version**: 1.0 -**Created**: February 24, 2025 -**Last Updated**: February 24, 2025 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/VantisOS/security/crypto_cascade.rs b/VantisOS/security/crypto_cascade.rs deleted file mode 100644 index 8718230ef..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/crypto_cascade.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,13 +0,0 @@ -use crate::security::vault::VaultKey; - -pub fn cascade_encrypt(data: &[u8], key: &VaultKey) -> Vec { - let a = crate::security::vault::encrypt(data, key); - let b = crate::security::vault::encrypt(&a, key); - crate::security::vault::encrypt(&b, key) -} - -pub fn cascade_decrypt(data: &[u8], key: &VaultKey) -> Vec { - let a = crate::security::vault::decrypt(data, key); - let b = crate::security::vault::decrypt(&a, key); - crate::security::vault::decrypt(&b, key) -} diff --git a/VantisOS/security/panic_protocol.rs b/VantisOS/security/panic_protocol.rs deleted file mode 100644 index ef53b0606..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/panic_protocol.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,23 +0,0 @@ -pub fn panic_nuke() { - zeroize_keys(); - flush_cpu_caches(); - disable_persistent_storage(); - reboot(); -} - -fn zeroize_keys() { - // placeholder: integrate with Vault keys - // overwrite memory regions holding secrets -} - -fn flush_cpu_caches() { - // platform-specific implementation -} - -fn disable_persistent_storage() { - // platform-specific implementation -} - -fn reboot() { - // platform-specific implementation -} diff --git a/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/build-threat-model.md b/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/build-threat-model.md deleted file mode 100644 index 2744de901..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/build-threat-model.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,48 +0,0 @@ -# Build Pipeline Threat Model - ---- - -## Threat T-001: Compromised Build Runner - -Description: -An attacker gains control over the build environment. - -Mitigation: -- Ephemeral runners -- No persistent credentials -- Minimal permissions - ---- - -## Threat T-002: Source Code Tampering - -Description: -Unauthorized changes introduced into source code. - -Mitigation: -- Branch protection -- Mandatory reviews -- Signed commits - ---- - -## Threat T-003: Dependency Poisoning - -Description: -Malicious dependency version is introduced. - -Mitigation: -- Hash-pinned dependencies -- SBOM verification -- No dynamic downloads during build - ---- - -## Threat T-004: Provenance Forgery - -Description: -Fake build provenance is generated. - -Mitigation: -- Sigstore signing -- Identity-bound provenance diff --git a/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/provenance.md b/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/provenance.md deleted file mode 100644 index 80560ddc5..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/provenance.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,17 +0,0 @@ -# Build Provenance Specification - ---- - -The following data must be included in provenance: - -- Source repository URL -- Commit SHA -- Builder identity -- Build timestamp -- Build parameters -- Artifact digest (SHA-256) - -Provenance must be: -- Automatically generated -- Cryptographically signed -- Immutable after generation diff --git a/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/slsa-policy.md b/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/slsa-policy.md deleted file mode 100644 index dd8324b93..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/supply-chain/slsa-policy.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,55 +0,0 @@ -# SLSA Level 4 Policy – VantisOS - ---- - -## 1. Target Level - -This project targets: -- SLSA Level: 4 -- Build isolation: Mandatory -- Provenance: Non-falsifiable -- Source integrity: Enforced - ---- - -## 2. Source Requirements - -- All source code must be stored in Git -- Branch protection enabled -- Mandatory code review (minimum 2 reviewers) -- Signed commits required - ---- - -## 3. Build Requirements - -- Builds must be fully reproducible -- Builds must run in ephemeral, isolated environments -- No manual build steps allowed -- Build scripts must be version-controlled - ---- - -## 4. Provenance Requirements - -- Provenance must be generated automatically -- Provenance must be cryptographically signed -- Provenance must include: - - Source commit hash - - Builder identity - - Build parameters - ---- - -## 5. Dependency Control - -- All dependencies must be pinned by hash -- No floating versions allowed -- SBOM generation is mandatory - ---- - -## 6. Verification - -- Provenance must be verified before release -- Verification failures block deployment diff --git a/VantisOS/security/vault.rs b/VantisOS/security/vault.rs deleted file mode 100644 index c983431a8..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/vault.rs +++ /dev/null @@ -1,32 +0,0 @@ -use zeroize::Zeroize; - -pub struct VaultKey { - key: Vec, -} - -impl VaultKey { - pub fn new(key: Vec) -> Self { - Self { key } - } - - pub fn as_slice(&self) -> &[u8] { - &self.key - } - - pub fn zeroize(&mut self) { - self.key.zeroize(); - } -} - -pub fn encrypt(data: &[u8], key: &VaultKey) -> Vec { - // placeholder: use AES-GCM in real implementation - let mut out = data.to_vec(); - out.reverse(); - out -} - -pub fn decrypt(data: &[u8], key: &VaultKey) -> Vec { - let mut out = data.to_vec(); - out.reverse(); - out -} diff --git a/VantisOS/security/vault_policy.toml b/VantisOS/security/vault_policy.toml deleted file mode 100644 index b72adff92..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/security/vault_policy.toml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,7 +0,0 @@ -[policy] -name = "vantis_vault_policy" -version = "0.1" - -[policy.rules] -# Example rule: only kernel can access master key -master_key_access = "kernel_only" diff --git a/VantisOS/tools/dev_setup_ultimate.sh b/VantisOS/tools/dev_setup_ultimate.sh deleted file mode 100644 index eecf10772..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/tools/dev_setup_ultimate.sh +++ /dev/null @@ -1,28 +0,0 @@ -#!/bin/bash -set -e - -echo "🔮 VANTIS OS: ULTIMATE SETUP" - -# 1. System Dependencies (Linux/Mac) -if [[ "$OSTYPE" == "linux-gnu"* ]]; then - sudo apt update && sudo apt install -y qemu-system-x86 nasm lld -elif [[ "$OSTYPE" == "darwin"* ]]; then - brew install qemu nasm llvm -fi - -# 2. Rust Nightly (Required for OS Dev) -rustup override set nightly -rustup component add rust-src llvm-tools-preview - -# 3. Git Hooks Install -cp scripts/pre-commit .git/hooks/pre-commit -chmod +x .git/hooks/pre-commit - -# 4. Generate Local Dev Keys (For Signing) -if [ ! -f "certs/dev.key" ]; then - mkdir -p certs - openssl genrsa -out certs/dev.key 2048 - echo "✅ Dev Keys Generated" -fi - -echo "🚀 ENVIRONMENT READY. TYPE 'just run' TO BOOT." diff --git a/VantisOS/tools/vlog b/VantisOS/tools/vlog deleted file mode 100644 index d1491788a..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/tools/vlog +++ /dev/null @@ -1,3 +0,0 @@ -vlog --kernel -vlog --boot -vlog --panic diff --git a/VantisOS/well-known/security.txt b/VantisOS/well-known/security.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 9ab88a49c..000000000 --- a/VantisOS/well-known/security.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,12 +0,0 @@ -# VANTIS OS SECURITY CONTACT -# RFC 9116 Compliance - -Contact: mailto:security@vantisos.com -Encryption: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/blob/master/SECURITY.md#pgp-key -Preferred-Languages: en, pl -Canonical: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/blob/master/.well-known/security.txt -Policy: https://github.com/vantisCorp/VantisOS/blob/master/SECURITY.md -Hiring: https://vantis.com/careers - -# INTEGRITY CHECK -# This file is signed. Check the signature in security.txt.sig diff --git a/VantisOS/installer/.gitkeep b/installer/.gitkeep similarity index 100% rename from VantisOS/installer/.gitkeep rename to installer/.gitkeep diff --git a/VantisOS/isolinux/.gitkeep b/isolinux/.gitkeep similarity index 100% rename from VantisOS/isolinux/.gitkeep rename to isolinux/.gitkeep diff --git a/VantisOS/kernel/.gitkeep b/kernel/.gitkeep similarity index 100% rename from VantisOS/kernel/.gitkeep rename to kernel/.gitkeep diff --git a/VantisOS/release/iso/vantis.cfg b/release/iso/vantis.cfg similarity index 100% rename from VantisOS/release/iso/vantis.cfg rename to release/iso/vantis.cfg