[0xcadams]

What

Preserve a company connection revision through the signed tnl_team_contexts claim as the same decimal string used by the authority API.

Why

The website receives string revisions from control and signs them into team-context claims. Keeping the claim numeric would require a lossy JavaScript conversion and break the exact round trip fixed at the bottom of this stack.

Changes

• Update the authored claim schema, its generated Go type, and the verifier’s JSON field encoding. Standard identity-provider timestamps remain numeric.
• Verify a real signed claim containing revision 9007199254740993, and reject the old numeric claim encoding.
• Keep provider setup, trust decisions, and signature verification unchanged. Focused OIDC, authority, state, and HTTP tests passed locally.

This requires the matching website companion; it does not redesign provider configuration.

[0xcadams]

Matching website claim signing, company state, and capability changes: https://github.com/tnldotdev/tnl.dev/pull/297, pinned to this stack head. All 26 real-Go authority boundary tests and 48 website PostgreSQL tests pass, along with 638 account tests and type/lint/generation/build checks. Deploy together; the companion documents that old numeric claims and company-connection payloads are not converted.

[0xcadams]

Final stack head: f804522; website companion #297 in tnldotdev/tnl.dev pins that revision. CI-discovered fixture and intermediate-generation issues are fixed downstack. Full connector/SDK integration and per-layer generation checks pass locally; fresh CI is still running. Nothing has been merged or deployed.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary: ❌ Failed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-11-13T17:30:55.110432Z	f7beb4f	Draft marked ready
🔒 Security Review	❌ Failed 2026-11-13T17:30:04.989765Z We couldn’t complete this review. Comment @codex security review to try again.	f7beb4f	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

The account paying for this security review has reached its Codex usage limits. The payer can check the Codex usage dashboard. For personal accounts, using credits requires enabling “Use credits for security reviews” in Code review settings. If you do not manage the paying account, contact this repository's admins.