c7n-kit 1.0.0__tar.gz

c7n_kit-1.0.0/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,202 @@
+
+                                 Apache License
+                           Version 2.0, January 2004
+                        http://www.apache.org/licenses/
+
+   TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE, REPRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION
+
+   1. Definitions.
+
+      "License" shall mean the terms and conditions for use, reproduction,
+      and distribution as defined by Sections 1 through 9 of this document.
+
+      "Licensor" shall mean the copyright owner or entity authorized by
+      the copyright owner that is granting the License.
+
+      "Legal Entity" shall mean the union of the acting entity and all
+      other entities that control, are controlled by, or are under common
+      control with that entity. For the purposes of this definition,
+      "control" means (i) the power, direct or indirect, to cause the
+      direction or management of such entity, whether by contract or
+      otherwise, or (ii) ownership of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
+      outstanding shares, or (iii) beneficial ownership of such entity.
+
+      "You" (or "Your") shall mean an individual or Legal Entity
+      exercising permissions granted by this License.
+
+      "Source" form shall mean the preferred form for making modifications,
+      including but not limited to software source code, documentation
+      source, and configuration files.
+
+      "Object" form shall mean any form resulting from mechanical
+      transformation or translation of a Source form, including but
+      not limited to compiled object code, generated documentation,
+      and conversions to other media types.
+
+      "Work" shall mean the work of authorship, whether in Source or
+      Object form, made available under the License, as indicated by a
+      copyright notice that is included in or attached to the work
+      (an example is provided in the Appendix below).
+
+      "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object
+      form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the
+      editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications
+      represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes
+      of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain
+      separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of,
+      the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
+
+      "Contribution" shall mean any work of authorship, including
+      the original version of the Work and any modifications or additions
+      to that Work or Derivative Works thereof, that is intentionally
+      submitted to Licensor for inclusion in the Work by the copyright owner
+      or by an individual or Legal Entity authorized to submit on behalf of
+      the copyright owner. For the purposes of this definition, "submitted"
+      means any form of electronic, verbal, or written communication sent
+      to the Licensor or its representatives, including but not limited to
+      communication on electronic mailing lists, source code control systems,
+      and issue tracking systems that are managed by, or on behalf of, the
+      Licensor for the purpose of discussing and improving the Work, but
+      excluding communication that is conspicuously marked or otherwise
+      designated in writing by the copyright owner as "Not a Contribution."
+
+      "Contributor" shall mean Licensor and any individual or Legal Entity
+      on behalf of whom a Contribution has been received by Licensor and
+      subsequently incorporated within the Work.
+
+   2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of,
+      publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the
+      Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.
+
+   3. Grant of Patent License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
+      this License, each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual,
+      worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
+      (except as stated in this section) patent license to make, have made,
+      use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer the Work,
+      where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable
+      by such Contributor that are necessarily infringed by their
+      Contribution(s) alone or by combination of their Contribution(s)
+      with the Work to which such Contribution(s) was submitted. If You
+      institute patent litigation against any entity (including a
+      cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that the Work
+      or a Contribution incorporated within the Work constitutes direct
+      or contributory patent infringement, then any patent licenses
+      granted to You under this License for that Work shall terminate
+      as of the date such litigation is filed.
+
+   4. Redistribution. You may reproduce and distribute copies of the
+      Work or Derivative Works thereof in any medium, with or without
+      modifications, and in Source or Object form, provided that You
+      meet the following conditions:
+
+      (a) You must give any other recipients of the Work or
+          Derivative Works a copy of this License; and
+
+      (b) You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices
+          stating that You changed the files; and
+
+      (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
+          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
+          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
+          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
+          the Derivative Works; and
+
+      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
+          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
+          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
+          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
+          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
+          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
+          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
+          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
+          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
+          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
+          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
+          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
+          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
+          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
+          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
+          as modifying the License.
+
+      You may add Your own copyright statement to Your modifications and
+      may provide additional or different license terms and conditions
+      for use, reproduction, or distribution of Your modifications, or
+      for any such Derivative Works as a whole, provided Your use,
+      reproduction, and distribution of the Work otherwise complies with
+      the conditions stated in this License.
+
+   5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
+      any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
+      by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
+      this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
+      Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
+      the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
+      with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
+
+   6. Trademarks. This License does not grant permission to use the trade
+      names, trademarks, service marks, or product names of the Licensor,
+      except as required for reasonable and customary use in describing the
+      origin of the Work and reproducing the content of the NOTICE file.
+
+   7. Disclaimer of Warranty. Unless required by applicable law or
+      agreed to in writing, Licensor provides the Work (and each
+      Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+      WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or
+      implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions
+      of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A
+      PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the
+      appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any
+      risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.
+
+   8. Limitation of Liability. In no event and under no legal theory,
+      whether in tort (including negligence), contract, or otherwise,
+      unless required by applicable law (such as deliberate and grossly
+      negligent acts) or agreed to in writing, shall any Contributor be
+      liable to You for damages, including any direct, indirect, special,
+      incidental, or consequential damages of any character arising as a
+      result of this License or out of the use or inability to use the
+      Work (including but not limited to damages for loss of goodwill,
+      work stoppage, computer failure or malfunction, or any and all
+      other commercial damages or losses), even if such Contributor
+      has been advised of the possibility of such damages.
+
+   9. Accepting Warranty or Additional Liability. While redistributing
+      the Work or Derivative Works thereof, You may choose to offer,
+      and charge a fee for, acceptance of support, warranty, indemnity,
+      or other liability obligations and/or rights consistent with this
+      License. However, in accepting such obligations, You may act only
+      on Your own behalf and on Your sole responsibility, not on behalf
+      of any other Contributor, and only if You agree to indemnify,
+      defend, and hold each Contributor harmless for any liability
+      incurred by, or claims asserted against, such Contributor by reason
+      of your accepting any such warranty or additional liability.
+
+   END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
+
+   APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work.
+
+      To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following
+      boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]"
+      replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include
+      the brackets!)  The text should be enclosed in the appropriate
+      comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a
+      file or class name and description of purpose be included on the
+      same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier
+      identification within third-party archives.
+
+   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
+
+   Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+   you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+   You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+   limitations under the License.

c7n_kit-1.0.0/PKG-INFO

@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
+Metadata-Version: 2.4
+Name: c7n-kit
+Version: 1.0.0
+Summary: Test Cloud Custodian policies offline, without AWS credentials, and measure compliance coverage.
+Author-email: Gustavo Ortega <5921963+gustavoortega@users.noreply.github.com>
+License-Expression: Apache-2.0
+Project-URL: Source, https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit
+Project-URL: Issues, https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit/issues
+Project-URL: Policy catalogue, https://github.com/gustavoortega/cloud-custodian-compliance-policies
+Project-URL: Write-up, https://gustavoortega.hashnode.dev/cloud-custodian-ships-an-engine-and-no-rules-here-are-325
+Keywords: cloud-custodian,c7n,aws,compliance,policy-as-code,cspm,testing
+Classifier: Development Status :: 5 - Production/Stable
+Classifier: Intended Audience :: Developers
+Classifier: Intended Audience :: System Administrators
+Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3
+Classifier: Topic :: Security
+Classifier: Topic :: System :: Systems Administration
+Requires-Python: >=3.11
+Description-Content-Type: text/markdown
+License-File: LICENSE
+Requires-Dist: c7n>=0.9.49
+Requires-Dist: pyyaml
+Provides-Extra: dev
+Requires-Dist: pytest; extra == "dev"
+Dynamic: license-file
+
+# c7n-kit: test Cloud Custodian policies offline, count what they cover
+
+Test Cloud Custodian policies offline, measure compliance coverage, and account for what a run could not look at. It bolts onto a clean `pip install c7n` and replaces nothing.
+
+[![ci](https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit/actions/workflows/ci.yml/badge.svg)](https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
+
+Cloud Custodian answers one question very well: which resources violate a rule you wrote in YAML. What it does not answer, because it is outside what the project set out to solve, is everything after that. How much of a framework you cover. Whether your rules are actually tested. What the run **could not look at**.
+
+The four policies shipped here are illustrative. What this repository publishes is the instrument, not a catalogue: every catalogue is different and ages with each AWS API change, and this does not.
+
+For a catalogue that uses it, see [cloud-custodian-compliance-policies](https://github.com/gustavoortega/cloud-custodian-compliance-policies), where the coverage report, the offline tests and the gap classifier all run against 325 policies in CI.
+
+What happened when that catalogue was pointed at itself, and why an absence is not a zero: [Cloud Custodian ships an engine and no rules. Here are 325.](https://gustavoortega.hashnode.dev/cloud-custodian-ships-an-engine-and-no-rules-here-are-325)
+
+---
+
+## Thirty seconds
+
+```
+git clone https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit.git && cd c7n-kit
+python -m venv .venv && .venv/bin/pip install c7n pyyaml pytest
+.venv/bin/python -m pytest -q
+```
+
+78 tests, **no AWS credentials and no network**. A filter that would need an AWS call raises with a clear message rather than returning an empty result that looks valid.
+
+---
+
+## Your rules are not tested
+
+A policy tested only against your own account is not tested. If your account does not have the odd case, the rule passes anyway and you find out the day it shows up.
+
+`c7n_kit/testing.py` runs c7n's **real** filter engine against resources you make up:
+
+```python
+from c7n_kit.testing import run_policy
+
+def test_rds_storage_unencrypted():
+    resources = [
+        {'DBInstanceIdentifier': 'a', 'StorageEncrypted': True},
+        {'DBInstanceIdentifier': 'b', 'StorageEncrypted': False},
+        {'DBInstanceIdentifier': 'c'},                    # the key never came back
+    ]
+    r = run_policy('examples/policies/rds-unencrypted.yaml',
+                   'rds-storage-unencrypted', resources)
+    assert [x['DBInstanceIdentifier'] for x in r] == ['b', 'c']
+```
+
+The third one is what matters and almost nobody writes it. In c7n a missing key evaluates to `None`, and `None == False` is `False`. A `value: false` filter lets through as compliant a resource where the field simply did not come back from AWS.
+
+There is also `verify_mutation`, which breaks your filter on purpose and checks the test goes red. A test that stays green with the bug in place is not testing anything. That one caught two of mine.
+
+## You cannot answer how much you cover
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.coverage catalogs/fsbp.txt examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit coverage catalogs/fsbp.txt examples/policies
+
+FSBP  3/369 controls (0%)
+catalog complete: yes
+orphans: none
+```
+
+The mapping lives in the policy, in the `metadata:` block that c7n accepts as an arbitrary object and carries through to the output:
+
+```yaml
+    metadata:
+      severity: high
+      frameworks: ['FSBP RDS.3', 'PCI 3.5.1']
+      frequency: daily
+```
+
+Two things here you will not find elsewhere.
+
+**Orphans** are controls your policies cite that do not exist in the catalogue. A rule claiming to cover `FSBP RDS.99` adds to your coverage forever and nobody notices. On its first real run this function found that one of the example policies in this very repo cited `PCI 3.4`, a v3.2.1 control renumbered to 3.5.1 in v4.0.
+
+**Catalogue completeness** is declared by the catalogue file itself and travels with the data, not as a separate argument. An incomplete catalogue produces false orphans and understates coverage. The PCI and CIS catalogues shipped here are incomplete and they say so:
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.coverage catalogs/cis-aws.txt examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit coverage catalogs/cis-aws.txt examples/policies
+
+CIS  1/36 controls (2%)
+catalog complete: NO -- the percentage is a floor, not the real number
+
+orphans (3) -- cited by a policy and absent from the catalog, they add coverage that doesn't exist:
+  CIS 2.3.1
+  CIS 5.2
+  CIS 5.6
+```
+
+A percentage without its denominator declared cannot go into an audit.
+
+## Every rule you add costs time, but not the way you think
+
+`c7n-org` enumerates resources **once per policy file** and then applies every filter to that list. What drives the cost of a run is the number of enumerations, not the number of rules.
+
+So cadence is declared per policy but executed **per resource type**, taking the fastest any of its rules asks for:
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.cadence examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit cadence examples/policies
+
+  aws.ec2                  4h
+  aws.rds                  daily
+  aws.s3                   daily
+  aws.security-group       4h
+
+promoted to the fast cadence: none
+```
+
+Apply cadence rule by rule instead and a type with rules in both frequencies gets enumerated twice a day, costing more than not splitting at all.
+
+`promoted_to_fast()` tells you which type landed on the expensive cadence **and which policy put it there**. Moving that one rule brings the whole type down.
+
+## The dashboard lies when you rename a rule
+
+If the dashboard has rule names typed by hand, the day you rename one its rows disappear. No error, no alert, the panel just shows less. And on a security dashboard, fewer findings reads as an improvement.
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.dashboard examples/template.json examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit dashboard examples/template.json examples/policies
+```
+
+The template carries `@@c7n:rules@@`, `@@c7n:severities@@`, `@@c7n:frameworks@@`, and the generator replaces them with whatever the policies declare today. The marker is deliberately ugly: Splunk uses `$field$`, Grafana `${field}` and Kibana `{{field}}` inside the same JSON, so anything prettier would have collided with the tool's own syntax.
+
+A marker that does not resolve **fails**. A template with no markers fails too, because generating a dashboard that picked up nothing from the repo is worse than not generating one.
+
+And `orphans()` tells you which rules the dashboard still cites that no longer exist:
+
+```python
+>>> orphans(dashboard, policies)
+['rds-storage-unencrypted']
+```
+
+One detail that nearly got me: **do not search for the names over the serialized JSON.** I had this same check written in another repo and it found zero names against a real dashboard, because the quotes are escaped and the regex never matches. It was a no-op passing green. Here it walks the structure, and descends into fields that store JSON as a string, which is what Kibana does with `searchSourceJSON`.
+
+## You do not know what the run could not look at
+
+This is the one that took me longest to understand and the one nobody writes about.
+
+If an account is missing permissions, or a region does not answer, or a policy dies halfway through, that account does not show up in the output. **And an account that does not show up looks exactly like a clean account.** The other problems get reported to you by someone. This one does not.
+
+`c7n_kit/gaps.py` reads `c7n-org` output and classifies what went unchecked:
+
+```
+5 coverage gap(s).
+
+⚠ 1 unclassified (UNKNOWN): investigate the raw message, it didn't match any known kind:
+  - team-c/us-east-1 whatever: ...error:Something nobody has seen before
+
+own-permission (1): add the permission to the role that runs c7n:
+  - apps/us-east-1 s3-inventory
+
+resource-policy (1): ask the resource owner to add the policy:
+  - security/us-east-1 kms-public [arn:aws:kms:us-east-1:1:key/abc]
+
+service-absent (2): scope the policy with region conditions, nothing to fix:
+  - team-a/sa-east-1 s3-express
+  - team-b/sa-east-1 s3-express
+```
+
+Three design decisions worth more than the code.
+
+**Each kind carries its action.** A permission missing from your role, which you fix, is not the same as one denied by the resource's own policy, which you have to ask its owner for. AWS separates them in the message itself (`no identity-based policy allows` versus `no resource-based policy allows`) and reporting both as "no permissions" sends the reader to check the role's permissions, which are fine.
+
+**`service-absent` is decided by consensus.** boto3 returns identical text for a network blip and for a service AWS does not offer in that region. What separates them is that the endpoint is per region and shared by every account: if it fails in several at once, it is the region.
+
+**`unknown` comes first and marked.** A new error shape landing in a silent bucket is the bug this kit exists to catch.
+
+There is a one-line-per-gap output for shipping to a SIEM.
+
+---
+
+## Take only what you need
+
+Every file in `c7n_kit/` works on its own. If all you want is the coverage report, take `c7n_kit/coverage.py` and `c7n_kit/policies.py` and you are done. No framework, no configuration, nothing to adopt.
+
+```
+c7n_kit/policies.py    loads policies and canonicalizes the resource type
+c7n_kit/coverage.py    cross against a framework catalogue
+c7n_kit/cadence.py     groups by type and resolves the frequency
+c7n_kit/gaps.py        classifies what the run could not look at
+c7n_kit/testing.py     runs your filters against resources you make up
+c7n_kit/dashboard.py   generates the dashboard from the repo
+```
+
+See `CONTRACTS.md` for the full API.
+
+---
+
+## The rule that governs all of it
+
+**An absence is not a zero.**
+
+If something could not be read, checked or resolved, it is never reported as zero, empty or compliant. It is reported as unknown, and it is visible.
+
+A field that never came back read as "not encrypted". A service that does not exist read as "the network failed". An account nobody could look at that renders exactly like a clean one. It is the same mistake wearing different clothes, and it is what makes a security dashboard lie without anyone noticing.
+
+The 78 tests here exist for that, and every one is mutation-verified: break what it claims to guard and check it goes red.
+
+---
+
+Apache 2.0

c7n_kit-1.0.0/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+# c7n-kit: test Cloud Custodian policies offline, count what they cover
+
+Test Cloud Custodian policies offline, measure compliance coverage, and account for what a run could not look at. It bolts onto a clean `pip install c7n` and replaces nothing.
+
+[![ci](https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit/actions/workflows/ci.yml/badge.svg)](https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit/actions/workflows/ci.yml)
+
+Cloud Custodian answers one question very well: which resources violate a rule you wrote in YAML. What it does not answer, because it is outside what the project set out to solve, is everything after that. How much of a framework you cover. Whether your rules are actually tested. What the run **could not look at**.
+
+The four policies shipped here are illustrative. What this repository publishes is the instrument, not a catalogue: every catalogue is different and ages with each AWS API change, and this does not.
+
+For a catalogue that uses it, see [cloud-custodian-compliance-policies](https://github.com/gustavoortega/cloud-custodian-compliance-policies), where the coverage report, the offline tests and the gap classifier all run against 325 policies in CI.
+
+What happened when that catalogue was pointed at itself, and why an absence is not a zero: [Cloud Custodian ships an engine and no rules. Here are 325.](https://gustavoortega.hashnode.dev/cloud-custodian-ships-an-engine-and-no-rules-here-are-325)
+
+---
+
+## Thirty seconds
+
+```
+git clone https://github.com/gustavoortega/c7n-kit.git && cd c7n-kit
+python -m venv .venv && .venv/bin/pip install c7n pyyaml pytest
+.venv/bin/python -m pytest -q
+```
+
+78 tests, **no AWS credentials and no network**. A filter that would need an AWS call raises with a clear message rather than returning an empty result that looks valid.
+
+---
+
+## Your rules are not tested
+
+A policy tested only against your own account is not tested. If your account does not have the odd case, the rule passes anyway and you find out the day it shows up.
+
+`c7n_kit/testing.py` runs c7n's **real** filter engine against resources you make up:
+
+```python
+from c7n_kit.testing import run_policy
+
+def test_rds_storage_unencrypted():
+    resources = [
+        {'DBInstanceIdentifier': 'a', 'StorageEncrypted': True},
+        {'DBInstanceIdentifier': 'b', 'StorageEncrypted': False},
+        {'DBInstanceIdentifier': 'c'},                    # the key never came back
+    ]
+    r = run_policy('examples/policies/rds-unencrypted.yaml',
+                   'rds-storage-unencrypted', resources)
+    assert [x['DBInstanceIdentifier'] for x in r] == ['b', 'c']
+```
+
+The third one is what matters and almost nobody writes it. In c7n a missing key evaluates to `None`, and `None == False` is `False`. A `value: false` filter lets through as compliant a resource where the field simply did not come back from AWS.
+
+There is also `verify_mutation`, which breaks your filter on purpose and checks the test goes red. A test that stays green with the bug in place is not testing anything. That one caught two of mine.
+
+## You cannot answer how much you cover
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.coverage catalogs/fsbp.txt examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit coverage catalogs/fsbp.txt examples/policies
+
+FSBP  3/369 controls (0%)
+catalog complete: yes
+orphans: none
+```
+
+The mapping lives in the policy, in the `metadata:` block that c7n accepts as an arbitrary object and carries through to the output:
+
+```yaml
+    metadata:
+      severity: high
+      frameworks: ['FSBP RDS.3', 'PCI 3.5.1']
+      frequency: daily
+```
+
+Two things here you will not find elsewhere.
+
+**Orphans** are controls your policies cite that do not exist in the catalogue. A rule claiming to cover `FSBP RDS.99` adds to your coverage forever and nobody notices. On its first real run this function found that one of the example policies in this very repo cited `PCI 3.4`, a v3.2.1 control renumbered to 3.5.1 in v4.0.
+
+**Catalogue completeness** is declared by the catalogue file itself and travels with the data, not as a separate argument. An incomplete catalogue produces false orphans and understates coverage. The PCI and CIS catalogues shipped here are incomplete and they say so:
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.coverage catalogs/cis-aws.txt examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit coverage catalogs/cis-aws.txt examples/policies
+
+CIS  1/36 controls (2%)
+catalog complete: NO -- the percentage is a floor, not the real number
+
+orphans (3) -- cited by a policy and absent from the catalog, they add coverage that doesn't exist:
+  CIS 2.3.1
+  CIS 5.2
+  CIS 5.6
+```
+
+A percentage without its denominator declared cannot go into an audit.
+
+## Every rule you add costs time, but not the way you think
+
+`c7n-org` enumerates resources **once per policy file** and then applies every filter to that list. What drives the cost of a run is the number of enumerations, not the number of rules.
+
+So cadence is declared per policy but executed **per resource type**, taking the fastest any of its rules asks for:
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.cadence examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit cadence examples/policies
+
+  aws.ec2                  4h
+  aws.rds                  daily
+  aws.s3                   daily
+  aws.security-group       4h
+
+promoted to the fast cadence: none
+```
+
+Apply cadence rule by rule instead and a type with rules in both frequencies gets enumerated twice a day, costing more than not splitting at all.
+
+`promoted_to_fast()` tells you which type landed on the expensive cadence **and which policy put it there**. Moving that one rule brings the whole type down.
+
+## The dashboard lies when you rename a rule
+
+If the dashboard has rule names typed by hand, the day you rename one its rows disappear. No error, no alert, the panel just shows less. And on a security dashboard, fewer findings reads as an improvement.
+
+```
+$ python -m c7n_kit.dashboard examples/template.json examples/policies
+$ c7n-kit dashboard examples/template.json examples/policies
+```
+
+The template carries `@@c7n:rules@@`, `@@c7n:severities@@`, `@@c7n:frameworks@@`, and the generator replaces them with whatever the policies declare today. The marker is deliberately ugly: Splunk uses `$field$`, Grafana `${field}` and Kibana `{{field}}` inside the same JSON, so anything prettier would have collided with the tool's own syntax.
+
+A marker that does not resolve **fails**. A template with no markers fails too, because generating a dashboard that picked up nothing from the repo is worse than not generating one.
+
+And `orphans()` tells you which rules the dashboard still cites that no longer exist:
+
+```python
+>>> orphans(dashboard, policies)
+['rds-storage-unencrypted']
+```
+
+One detail that nearly got me: **do not search for the names over the serialized JSON.** I had this same check written in another repo and it found zero names against a real dashboard, because the quotes are escaped and the regex never matches. It was a no-op passing green. Here it walks the structure, and descends into fields that store JSON as a string, which is what Kibana does with `searchSourceJSON`.
+
+## You do not know what the run could not look at
+
+This is the one that took me longest to understand and the one nobody writes about.
+
+If an account is missing permissions, or a region does not answer, or a policy dies halfway through, that account does not show up in the output. **And an account that does not show up looks exactly like a clean account.** The other problems get reported to you by someone. This one does not.
+
+`c7n_kit/gaps.py` reads `c7n-org` output and classifies what went unchecked:
+
+```
+5 coverage gap(s).
+
+⚠ 1 unclassified (UNKNOWN): investigate the raw message, it didn't match any known kind:
+  - team-c/us-east-1 whatever: ...error:Something nobody has seen before
+
+own-permission (1): add the permission to the role that runs c7n:
+  - apps/us-east-1 s3-inventory
+
+resource-policy (1): ask the resource owner to add the policy:
+  - security/us-east-1 kms-public [arn:aws:kms:us-east-1:1:key/abc]
+
+service-absent (2): scope the policy with region conditions, nothing to fix:
+  - team-a/sa-east-1 s3-express
+  - team-b/sa-east-1 s3-express
+```
+
+Three design decisions worth more than the code.
+
+**Each kind carries its action.** A permission missing from your role, which you fix, is not the same as one denied by the resource's own policy, which you have to ask its owner for. AWS separates them in the message itself (`no identity-based policy allows` versus `no resource-based policy allows`) and reporting both as "no permissions" sends the reader to check the role's permissions, which are fine.
+
+**`service-absent` is decided by consensus.** boto3 returns identical text for a network blip and for a service AWS does not offer in that region. What separates them is that the endpoint is per region and shared by every account: if it fails in several at once, it is the region.
+
+**`unknown` comes first and marked.** A new error shape landing in a silent bucket is the bug this kit exists to catch.
+
+There is a one-line-per-gap output for shipping to a SIEM.
+
+---
+
+## Take only what you need
+
+Every file in `c7n_kit/` works on its own. If all you want is the coverage report, take `c7n_kit/coverage.py` and `c7n_kit/policies.py` and you are done. No framework, no configuration, nothing to adopt.
+
+```
+c7n_kit/policies.py    loads policies and canonicalizes the resource type
+c7n_kit/coverage.py    cross against a framework catalogue
+c7n_kit/cadence.py     groups by type and resolves the frequency
+c7n_kit/gaps.py        classifies what the run could not look at
+c7n_kit/testing.py     runs your filters against resources you make up
+c7n_kit/dashboard.py   generates the dashboard from the repo
+```
+
+See `CONTRACTS.md` for the full API.
+
+---
+
+## The rule that governs all of it
+
+**An absence is not a zero.**
+
+If something could not be read, checked or resolved, it is never reported as zero, empty or compliant. It is reported as unknown, and it is visible.
+
+A field that never came back read as "not encrypted". A service that does not exist read as "the network failed". An account nobody could look at that renders exactly like a clean one. It is the same mistake wearing different clothes, and it is what makes a security dashboard lie without anyone noticing.
+
+The 78 tests here exist for that, and every one is mutation-verified: break what it claims to guard and check it goes red.
+
+---
+
+Apache 2.0