The scenario reads "an account not connected to another does not read its
protected ENTITY, then reads it after connecting", but the probe was reading
`did🆖${protected_store_id}` — the STORE document — and writing its test
entities straight into it.
Under an ACL that shortcut was harmless. Under key possession it is wrong, and
for a reason the model states outright: sharing a store capability would hand
over everything the store contains, present and future. The unit of sharing is
the document. `declareConnections` therefore shares the keys of entity
documents, the store is not one of them, and the reader legitimately saw
nothing. The code was right; the probe was standing in the store for an entity.
Writing several entities into a store-level document also broke this repo's own
one-document-per-entity rule.
The probe now creates a real protected entity document, writes the entity there,
and mounts its subscription on THAT document.
A second defect surfaced while fixing the first: `connect()` asserted both
directions from the READER's session, but a capability can only be shared by
whoever holds it, and `capFor` answers for the connected identity alone — so the
owner-side call returned early having shared nothing. Each direction is now
asserted from its own session, and the reader drains its inbox afterwards.
The reader is a genuine second identity (per-run identifiers give it its own
account, stores, inbox and keyring), not the same one in disguise — a test that
passes because the state is unreal proves nothing. Checked by breaking it on
purpose: without `connect` it fails with `expected +0 to equal 1`.
Also recorded, and worth knowing before writing another probe: `resetCaps()`
clears the "a capability was issued" flag, which disarms the read filter
entirely — it has to run BEFORE the first mint, or reads go straight through and
the reader sees everything.
tsc 0, @ui 7/7, target scenario green, read-filter not regressed.
Sylvain Duchesne
47af46fd09