| # Boundary Statement |
|
|
| ## Secure Packet Transfer Integrity Stack v0.1 |
|
|
| This project does **not** introduce a new cryptographic protocol and does **not** replace TLS, QUIC, WireGuard, IPsec, SSH, certificate authorities, cryptographic libraries, or production network security standards. |
|
|
| The Secure Packet Transfer Integrity Stack is a **systems-integrity map**. It uses HIR/OAM pressure-form language to organize transfer fidelity, session integrity, boundary preservation, authentication gates, audit-chain continuity, degradation detection, and claim boundaries around existing secure protocols. |
|
|
| ## Allowed claims |
|
|
| This branch may claim: |
|
|
| - A structural map for packet-transfer integrity review. |
| - A HIR/OAM framing for payload fidelity, route/session integrity, boundary preservation, authentication gates, and transport pressure. |
| - A GREEN/YELLOW/RED classification model for transfer-state reasoning. |
| - A provenance and audit-ledger template for reviewing transfer evidence. |
| - A testable conceptual framework for future toy simulations or lab demonstrations. |
|
|
| ## Disallowed claims unless separately validated |
|
|
| This branch must not claim: |
|
|
| - A new encryption method. |
| - A replacement for TLS, QUIC, WireGuard, IPsec, SSH, or existing cryptographic standards. |
| - Production readiness. |
| - Formal security proof. |
| - Empirical validation against real-world adversaries. |
| - Cryptographic superiority. |
| - Prevention of all packet loss, man-in-the-middle attacks, replay, endpoint compromise, or metadata leakage. |
|
|
| ## Correct framing |
|
|
| Primordial Code / HIR-OAM governs **packet-transfer integrity around existing secure protocols**. It does not replace the protocols themselves. |
|
|
