• Home
  • Features
  • Pricing
  • Docs
  • Announcements
  • Sign In

archetech / archon / 32862541985
87%

Build:
DEFAULT BRANCH: main
Ran 25 Aug 2026 02:59PM UTC
Jobs 1
Files 91
Run time 1min
Badge
Embed ▾
README BADGES
x

If you need to use a raster PNG badge, change the '.svg' to '.png' in the link

Markdown

Textile

RDoc

HTML

Rst

25 Aug 2026 02:55PM UTC coverage: 93.932%. Remained the same
32862541985

push

github

web-flow
docs: correct four factual claims in the whitepaper (#942)

* docs: correct four factual claims in the whitepaper

Each correction was checked against the code, and where the paper already
stated the accurate version somewhere else, that wording is what the
corrected section now matches.

§10.1 key derivation. The diagram showed m/44'/0'/0' captioned "Bitcoin
keys", plus m/84' (SegWit), m/86' (Taproot) and m/390' for DID signing.
None of 390', 84' or 86' appears anywhere in the TypeScript or Python
sources. The real derivation is m/44'/0'/{account}' with one hardened
account per identity (createId assigns account = wallet.counter), signing
keys indexed on change=0 (rotateKeys advances to index + 1), and the
X25519 key-agreement key on change=1. So the diagram not only listed
three branches that do not exist, it mislabelled the one that does.

§6.5 revocation. "If the DID is revoked, didDocumentData is cleared,
ensuring data lifecycle management" sat one bullet below "Full version
history is preserved through the operation chain". Revocation appends a
delete operation; the resolver increments the version and returns an
empty didDocumentData with deactivated set. Earlier versions are
untouched, and time-travel resolution to a version before the revocation
returns the data in full. A reader could take the old wording as a
promise of deletion and store something on that basis, so the section now
says plainly that revocation is not erasure and that anything written to
didDocumentData should be treated as permanently published.

That property is pinned by a test rather than left to prose, since it is
the kind of claim someone may rely on when deciding what is safe to
store.

IPFS availability. "Global availability of DID operations" and "no single
point of failure" conflated content addressing with persistence. §10.3
already had it right -- a CID proves integrity -- and the architecture
agrees: operations live in each node's database, full nodes store every... (continued)

3854 of 4341 branches covered (88.78%)

Branch coverage included in aggregate %.

8484 of 8794 relevant lines covered (96.47%)

692.69 hits per line

Jobs
ID Job ID Ran Files Coverage
1 32862541985.1 25 Aug 2026 02:59PM UTC 182
94.94
GitHub Action Run
Source Files on build 32862541985
  • Tree
  • List 91
  • Changed 77
  • Source Changed 0
  • Coverage Changed 77
Coverage ∆ File Lines Relevant Covered Missed Hits/Line Branch Hits Branch Misses
  • Back to Repo
  • Github Actions Build #32862541985
  • 107e3a27 on github
  • Prev Build on main (#32803409350)
  • Next Build on main (#32876748443)
  • Delete
STATUS · Troubleshooting · Open an Issue · Sales · Support · CAREERS · ENTERPRISE · START FREE TRIAL · SCHEDULE DEMO
ANNOUNCEMENTS · TWITTER · TOS & SLA · Supported CI Services · What's a CI service? · Automated Testing

© 2026 Coveralls, Inc