* Correct the drift timeline: it was not "three months" of public red

Four documents (README, AUDIT_READINESS, BLOCKERS, the follow-up workflow)
claimed the live-deployment check "failed in public for three months". Both
halves are false, and git says so:

  2026-06-16  committed contract diverges from deployed app 763809096
  2026-08-13  #12 rebuilds verify_deployment.py so it CAN fail
  2026-08-30  testnet-followup.yml lands; the drift goes red in public
  2026-09-03  closed by deploying 770964251 from the committed artifact

So the divergence was 79 days, not three months -- and for 58 of them
NOTHING DETECTED IT, because the verifier of the day hashed the deployed
program and compared it to the chain. The job that "failed in public" did
not exist until day 75; it was red for 4 days, not 90.

The honest account is worse for us and more useful to a reviewer: this
repo's flagship drift was missed for two months by a check that could not
fail -- the same defect class the project keeps finding. Claiming we left
it red on purpose for three months converted a detection failure into a
discipline story. It also would not have survived first contact with
anyone running `git log`.

Also corrects the guard docstring in
sdk/tests/test_reports_print_on_a_windows_console.py, which said the U+2194
line stayed invisible because "the happy path never touches it". The drift
branch DID run -- on Linux CI, where the stream is UTF-8 and the character
encodes fine. The uncovered case was never the failure path; it was the
failure path on a cp1252 stream.

And drops "which is the property the contract exists to demonstrate" from
the README: I5 is a control the contract enforces, not its purpose. The
contract exists to verify Falcon-1024 on-chain via falcon_verify.

Found by putting the draft write-up to the Apex Council for refutation
before publishing it, per the standing directive. 3 of 4 responding seats
refuted; the arithmetic objection was checkable and correct.

Verification (FALCON_DET1024_LIB set, TRELYAN_REQUIRE_KAT=1):
  sdk/tests  145 passed, 5 skipped
  drift banner + app-id partition + cp1252 guards  35 passed

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

* Record that on-chain acceptance is NOT independent verification

AUDIT_READINESS lists the on-chain verifier (go-algorand's falcon_verify)
and the pinned signer source (algorand/falcon @ ce15e75b) as adjacent rows
and never states what follows from putting them together:

  go-algorand go.mod  -> github.com/algorand/falcon v0.1.0 -> ce15e75b
  this repo pins      -> algorand/falcon                      ce15e75b

They are the same C source at the same commit. So "the AVM verified our
signature" is a sign/verify round-trip inside ONE implementation, not
cross-implementation evidence -- and combined with the interop KAT being
unrunnable by construction (det1024 0xBA vs randomized 0x3A), NOTHING
currently checks these signatures against an independent Falcon.

Caught while adversarially reviewing a draft write-up that claimed the AVM
was "a different implementation accepting our bytes". No shipped document
made that claim, so this commit adds no retraction -- it adds the caveat
that stops the claim being made, by us or by a reader reading two rows of
a table in the natural order.

The pin itself is correct and must not be bumped: matching what the chain
runs is the entire point. The defect was leaving the consequence unwritten.

Security impact: documentation only, no code path changes. The caveat
WEAKENS a claim an auditor could otherwise have inferred from this file.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

AUDIT_READINESS lists the on-chain verifier (go-algorand's falcon_verify)
and the pinned signer source (algorand/falcon @ ce15e75b) as adjacent rows
and never states what follows from putting them together:

  go-algorand go.mod  -> github.com/algorand/falcon v0.1.0 -> ce15e75b
  this repo pins      -> algorand/falcon                      ce15e75b

They are the same C source at the same commit. So "the AVM verified our
signature" is a sign/verify round-trip inside ONE implementation, not
cross-implementation evidence -- and combined with the interop KAT being
unrunnable by construction (det1024 0xBA vs randomized 0x3A), NOTHING
currently checks these signatures against an independent Falcon.

Caught while adversarially reviewing a draft write-up that claimed the AVM
was "a different implementation accepting our bytes". No shipped document
made that claim, so this commit adds no retraction -- it adds the caveat
that stops the claim being made, by us or by a reader reading two rows of
a table in the natural order.

The pin itself is correct and must not be bumped: matching what the chain
runs is the entire point. The defect was leaving the consequence unwritten.

Security impact: documentation only, no code path changes. The caveat
WEAKENS a claim an auditor could otherwise have inferred from this file.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Four documents (README, AUDIT_READINESS, BLOCKERS, the follow-up workflow)
claimed the live-deployment check "failed in public for three months". Both
halves are false, and git says so:

  2026-06-16  committed contract diverges from deployed app 763809096
  2026-08-13  #12 rebuilds verify_deployment.py so it CAN fail
  2026-08-30  testnet-followup.yml lands; the drift goes red in public
  2026-09-03  closed by deploying 770964251 from the committed artifact

So the divergence was 79 days, not three months -- and for 58 of them
NOTHING DETECTED IT, because the verifier of the day hashed the deployed
program and compared it to the chain. The job that "failed in public" did
not exist until day 75; it was red for 4 days, not 90.

The honest account is worse for us and more useful to a reviewer: this
repo's flagship drift was missed for two months by a check that could not
fail -- the same defect class the project keeps finding. Claiming we left
it red on purpose for three months converted a detection failure into a
discipline story. It also would not have survived first contact with
anyone running `git log`.

Also corrects the guard docstring in
sdk/tests/test_reports_print_on_a_windows_console.py, which said the U+2194
line stayed invisible because "the happy path never touches it". The drift
branch DID run -- on Linux CI, where the stream is UTF-8 and the character
encodes fine. The uncovered case was never the failure path; it was the
failure path on a cp1252 stream.

And drops "which is the property the contract exists to demonstrate" from
the README: I5 is a control the contract enforces, not its purpose. The
contract exists to verify Falcon-1024 on-chain via falcon_verify.

Found by putting the draft write-up to the Apex Council for refutation
before publishing it, per the standing directive. 3 of 4 responding seats
refuted; the arithmetic objection was checkable and correct.

Verification (FALCON_DET1024_LIB set, TRELYAN_REQUIRE_KAT=1):
  sdk/tests  145 passed, 5 skipped
  drift banner + app-id partition + cp1252 guards  35 passed

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Drift banner crashed a Windows console, downgrading exit 1 (DRIFT) to exit 2 (could not check)

Updates the requirements on [@typescript-eslint/parser](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/tree/HEAD/packages/parser) to permit the latest version.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/releases)
- [Changelog](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/blob/main/packages/parser/CHANGELOG.md)
- [Commits](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/commits/v8.69.0/packages/parser)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: "@typescript-eslint/parser"
  dependency-version: 8.69.0
  dependency-type: direct:development
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>

Updates the requirements on [@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/tree/HEAD/packages/eslint-plugin) to permit the latest version.
- [Release notes](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/releases)
- [Changelog](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/blob/main/packages/eslint-plugin/CHANGELOG.md)
- [Commits](https://github.com/typescript-eslint/typescript-eslint/commits/v8.69.0/packages/eslint-plugin)

---
updated-dependencies:
- dependency-name: "@typescript-eslint/eslint-plugin"
  dependency-version: 8.69.0
  dependency-type: direct:development
...

Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>

Co-authored-by: cce <51567+cce@users.noreply.github.com>