feat(ci): detect Gitea settings drift -- the blind spot that hid a month of outage

Every check in this repo reads the repository, the rendered manifests, or the cluster.
NONE could see Gitea's own database, and that is where branch protection and runner
registration live. Three failures came out of that blind spot on 2026-09-29, all the same
shape -- a setting that READ as enforced while not being, with nothing able to notice:

  * main had NO branch protection for ~a month while DECISIONS-LOG recorded it as a
    required status check;
  * ZERO Actions runners were registered, so PR #1 -- the first PR this repo ever had --
    sat pending for 30.6 minutes with nothing to execute it;
  * after enable_status_check and required_approvals were turned on they STILL did not
    bite, because block_admin_merge_override was false: PRs #5-#9 merged with zero
    approvals recorded against required_approvals: 1.

infra/gitea/*.sh ASSERT the desired state. Nothing DETECTED drift from it. This is the
detector.

ci/gitea-settings.sh runs as a merge-gate stage: it diffs the live rule at
/branch_protections/main against infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json and asserts at
least one runner is online. It reads the RULE object, not /branches/main -- the branch view
does not expose block_admin_merge_override and showed all-green while the rule was
overridable by the only account that merges.

Verified by test, not assumed:
  no token            -> exit 3, skips loudly, does NOT block
  live == declaration -> exit 0
  injected drift      -> exit 1, blocks, naming both the drifted key and the runner count

The skip is DELIBERATELY not in gate.sh's strict-skips loop. Making an absent credential
block every PR is precisely the lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps walking into, so
a skip denies a PASS (exit 3) and says loudly what is unverified. REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true
upgrades it to a block once the token is wired.

gate.yml's `|| [ "$?" -eq 3 ]` tolerance now covers a second stage. That widening is
declared in the file rather than left to be discovered, and it narrows back the moment
REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS is set.

infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh mints the token and stores it as the repo Actions secret without
ever printing the value.

UNTIL THAT TOKEN EXISTS THIS STAGE SKIPS, AND A SKIPPED DETECTOR DETECTS NOTHING.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>

.gitea/workflows/gate.yml

@@ -110,9 +110,22 @@ jobs:
       # UNVERIFIED and NAMED in the PASS headline, never faked green. GATE_STRICT_SKIPS + the
       # tolerated exit 3 are explained in the file header; the tolerance covers exactly one
       # thing, the unverifiable spec repo, and nothing else can produce a 3 here.
+      # GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN feeds ci/gitea-settings.sh, the only check that can see Gitea's
+      # OWN database (branch protection + runner registration) — the blind spot that let `main`
+      # sit unprotected with zero runners for a month while this repo recorded both as working.
+      # Referenced BY NAME only; create it with infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh.
+      #
+      # WIDENED TOLERANCE, DECLARED: `|| [ "$?" -eq 3 ]` used to cover exactly one skip
+      # (spec-immutability). It now also covers gitea-settings skipping when that secret is
+      # absent. That is a deliberate, temporary weakening: making an unwired credential BLOCK
+      # every PR is the lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps walking into. Once the secret
+      # exists and the stage has been SEEN green, set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true below and the
+      # tolerance narrows back to spec-immutability alone.
       - name: Merge gate — ci/gate.sh (what `make -C ci gate` runs)
         env:
           GATE_STRICT_SKIPS: "true"
+          GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN }}
+          # REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS: "true"   # <- uncomment AFTER seeing gitea-settings green
         run: ./ci/gate.sh || [ "$?" -eq 3 ]
 
       # NOTE: no actions/upload-artifact step. Gitea Actions rejects upload-artifact@v4

DECISIONS-LOG.md

@@ -4924,3 +4924,43 @@ being unable to recur.
 4. `required_approvals: 1` means a PR you open as `jakman85` needs `gitea-admin` to approve.
    If that friction bites, either open agent work as `gitea-admin` and review as `jakman85`, or
    drop back to relying on the status check alone.
+
+## 2026-09-29 (later still) — the enforcement we "turned on" was overridable by the account that merges
+
+`enable_status_check: true` and `required_approvals: 1` were set earlier today and recorded as
+done. **They did not bite.** `block_admin_merge_override` was `false`, and Gitea lets repository
+admins override merge requirements without it. `jakman85` holds `owner`, so both requirements
+were bypassable by exactly the account that performs every merge.
+
+**The evidence was already on the record and nobody read it:** PRs #5, #6, #7, #8 and #9 all
+merged while `required_approvals: 1` was in force, with **zero approvals recorded on any of
+them**. A one-line check (`/pulls/{n}/reviews`) would have shown it at any point.
+
+Two process failures, both mine, both the same shape as the original defect:
+
+1. **I verified with the wrong view.** `/branches/main` reports `protected`,
+   `enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` but NOT `block_admin_merge_override`. It
+   showed everything green while the rule was overridable. The authoritative object is
+   `/branch_protections/main` — read it and enumerate its keys.
+2. **I probed for a field name I assumed existed.** This Gitea (1.24.3) has no
+   `apply_to_admins`. Asking `jq` for it returns `null`, which reads exactly like "set to
+   false" but means "key absent" — so a PATCH that silently did nothing looked like a real
+   before/after. **`jq` returning null is not a value; it may be an absence.** Enumerate with
+   `to_entries`.
+
+Now `block_admin_merge_override: true`, applied and read back. `infra/gitea/require-gate.sh`
+sets it, and `infra/gitea/block-admin-override.sh` fixes it in isolation.
+
+**This is still only a setting.** It is proven when a green PR is REFUSED a merge until
+approved — and that has not been observed yet. This PR is the test: if it merges without an
+approval, the fix did not work and the finding stands.
+
+### The governance question this exposes
+
+There are two accounts: `jakman85` (owner, the human) and `gitea-admin` (the agent). With
+approvals now genuinely required, an agent-authored PR is approved by the human — which is the
+intent. But a PR authored by `jakman85` needs `gitea-admin` to approve it, i.e. the automation
+account rubber-stamping the human. That is ceremony, not review. Options: keep it and accept
+the ceremony; drop `required_approvals` to 0 and rely on the status check, which is the gate
+that actually verifies something; or add a second human account. **This is a decision for the
+operator, not a default to be chosen silently.**

ci/Makefile

@@ -32,6 +32,9 @@ render-golden: ## render==golden: canonical render reproduces committed apps/ (n
 l1: ## L1 rendering checks (no cluster; live now)
 	@"$(CI_DIR)l1.sh"
 
+gitea-settings: ## Gitea branch protection + runners match infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json (SKIPS w/o GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN)
+	@./gitea-settings.sh
+
 conformance: ## L2/L3 in-cluster Chainsaw Job (SKIPS w/o CLUSTER_AVAILABLE=true)
 	@"$(CI_DIR)conformance.sh"
 

ci/gate.sh

@@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ run_stage lint          "${CI_DIR}/lint.sh"
 run_stage l0            "${CI_DIR}/l0.sh"
 run_stage render-golden "${CI_DIR}/render-golden.sh"
 run_stage l1            "${CI_DIR}/l1.sh"
+run_stage gitea-settings "${CI_DIR}/gitea-settings.sh"
 run_stage conformance   "${CI_DIR}/conformance.sh"
 
 echo >&2
@@ -188,6 +189,31 @@ case "${OUTCOME[spec-immutability]}" in
   pass) ok   "spec-immutability: green" ;;
 esac
 
+# gitea-settings: the ONLY check that can see Gitea's own database (branch protection +
+# runner registration). A FAIL is real drift and always blocks -- that is the whole point.
+# A SKIP means no token or unreachable Gitea, which is an UNWIRED CREDENTIAL, not a defect
+# in the change under test. It is deliberately NOT in the strict-skips loop below: making an
+# absent secret block every PR is precisely the lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps
+# walking into (a required check with nothing able to satisfy it). So a skip denies a PASS
+# (exit 3) and says loudly what is unverified. Set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true once the
+# token is wired, and the skip becomes a block as it should.
+case "${OUTCOME[gitea-settings]}" in
+  fail) err "gitea-settings: Gitea DRIFTED from infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json -> blocks merge"; BLOCK=1 ;;
+  skip)
+    if truthy "${REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS:-false}"; then
+      err "gitea-settings: skipped and REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true -> blocks merge"
+      summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED** (no token) — blocks merge (REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true)"
+      BLOCK=1
+    else
+      warn "gitea-settings: skipped (no GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN) — branch protection and runner"
+      warn "  registration are UNVERIFIED. Both were silently wrong for a month. Wire the token"
+      warn "  (infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh), then set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true."
+      summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED** (no token — protection/runners unverified; not a pass)"
+      NOT_ESTABLISHED+=("gitea-settings")
+    fi ;;
+  pass) ok "gitea-settings: green" ;;
+esac
+
 # L0/L1 stages: any failure blocks. A SKIP here means a pinned tool is missing or a seam is
 # unwired — NEVER green. In CI (strict) that is a defect and blocks; on a workstation it
 # degrades to UNDETERMINED, which is still non-zero and still not a pass. render-golden is a

ci/gitea-settings.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# ci/gitea-settings.sh — Stage: the Gitea platform settings that gate this repo still
+# match what git declares.
+#
+# WHY THIS STAGE EXISTS AT ALL
+# ----------------------------
+# Every other check in this repo reads the repository, the rendered manifests, or the
+# cluster. NONE of them can see Gitea's own database — and that is where branch
+# protection and runner registration live. On 2026-09-29 that blind spot was measured:
+#
+#   * `main` had NO branch protection, and
+#   * ZERO Actions runners were registered,
+#
+# for roughly a month, while DECISIONS-LOG.md recorded both as working and every agent
+# and human in the loop repeated that claim because the repository said so. PR #1 — the
+# first pull request this repo ever had — sat `pending` for 30.6 minutes with nothing to
+# execute it. Later the same day `enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` were turned
+# on and STILL did not bite, because `block_admin_merge_override` was false; PRs #5-#9
+# merged with zero approvals recorded against `required_approvals: 1`.
+#
+# Three separate failures, one shape: a setting that READ as enforced while not being, with
+# no mechanism anywhere that could notice. Scripts that ASSERT the desired state
+# (infra/gitea/*.sh) do not detect drift from it. This stage is the detector.
+#
+# WHAT IT ASSERTS
+#   1. every key in infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json `.protection` matches the
+#      LIVE rule at /repos/{repo}/branch_protections/{branch}, exactly;
+#   2. at least `.runners_online_min` Actions runners report status "online".
+#
+# (2) is not decoration. A required status check with no runner is the deadlock this repo
+# nearly walked into: every PR pends forever, including the one that would fix it.
+#
+# READ THE RULE OBJECT, NOT THE BRANCH VIEW. /repos/{repo}/branches/{branch} reports
+# `protected`, `enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` but NOT
+# `block_admin_merge_override` — it showed all-green while the rule was overridable by the
+# only account that merges. This stage queries /branch_protections/ deliberately.
+#
+# EXIT CODES (the gate contract)
+#   0  live Gitea matches the declaration
+#   1  DIVERGENCE — something drifted, or was never applied. Blocks the merge.
+#   3  SKIP — no token, or Gitea unreachable. Never a pass; see gate.sh, which treats this
+#      skip like spec-immutability's (UNDETERMINED, exit 3) rather than a hard block, so
+#      that an unwired credential cannot lock the repository.
+#
+# TO WIRE IT: create a Gitea repo secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN (a token that can read repo
+# settings) — infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh does it. Until then this stage skips LOUDLY and
+# the drift it exists to catch is still undetected.
+set -euo pipefail
+CI_DIR="$(cd "$(dirname "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}")" && pwd)"
+REPO_ROOT="$(cd "${CI_DIR}/.." && pwd)"
+# shellcheck disable=SC1091
+source "${CI_DIR}/lib.sh"
+
+log "Stage: Gitea platform settings match the declaration"
+
+DECL="${REPO_ROOT}/infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json"
+GITEA_URL="${GITEA_URL:-https://gitea.home.keithjackson.dev}"
+GITEA_REPO="${GITEA_REPO:-Home-Network/home-network-k3s-impl}"
+TOKEN="${GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN:-}"
+
+[ -f "$DECL" ] || die "declaration missing: ${DECL}"
+require_tool jq
+require_tool curl
+
+if [ -z "$TOKEN" ]; then
+  skip "GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN is not set — cannot read the live Gitea rule."
+  skip "  Branch protection and runner registration are therefore UNVERIFIED. They were"
+  skip "  wrong, unnoticed, for a month (2026-09-29). Wire it: infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh"
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED — no token** (protection + runners UNVERIFIED; not a pass)"
+  exit 3
+fi
+
+api() { curl -sS --max-time 20 -H "Authorization: token ${TOKEN}" "$@"; }
+
+BRANCH="$(jq -r '.branch' "$DECL")"
+LIVE="$(api "${GITEA_URL}/api/v1/repos/${GITEA_REPO}/branch_protections/${BRANCH}" || true)"
+if [ -z "$LIVE" ] || ! jq -e 'type == "object" and has("branch_name")' >/dev/null 2>&1 <<<"$LIVE"; then
+  skip "could not read the branch-protection rule from ${GITEA_URL} (unreachable, or the token"
+  skip "  lacks permission). Not treating this as a pass."
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **SKIPPED — Gitea unreadable** (not a pass)"
+  exit 3
+fi
+
+RC=0
+
+# --- 1. every declared protection key must match the live rule, exactly ---------------
+while IFS= read -r key; do
+  want="$(jq -Sc --arg k "$key" '.protection[$k]' "$DECL")"
+  got="$(jq -Sc --arg k "$key" 'if has($k) then .[$k] else "<<ABSENT>>" end' <<<"$LIVE")"
+  if [ "$want" = "$got" ]; then
+    ok "  ${key} = ${got}"
+  else
+    err "  ${key}: DECLARED ${want} but LIVE is ${got}"
+    RC=1
+  fi
+done < <(jq -r '.protection | keys[]' "$DECL")
+
+# --- 2. a runner must actually be online ----------------------------------------------
+MIN="$(jq -r '.runners_online_min // 1' "$DECL")"
+RUNNERS="$(api "${GITEA_URL}/api/v1/admin/actions/runners" || true)"
+N="$(jq -r '[(.runners//[])[]|select(.status=="online")]|length' <<<"${RUNNERS:-{\}}" 2>/dev/null || echo 0)"
+if [ "${N:-0}" -ge "$MIN" ]; then
+  ok "  runners online: ${N} (>= ${MIN})"
+else
+  err "  runners online: ${N}, DECLARED minimum ${MIN}."
+  err "  A required status check with no runner leaves every PR pending forever —"
+  err "  including the PR that would fix it. This is the 2026-09-29 outage condition."
+  RC=1
+fi
+
+if [ "$RC" -eq 0 ]; then
+  ok "Gitea settings match the declaration."
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **green** (branch protection + runners match \`infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json\`)"
+else
+  err "Gitea has DRIFTED from infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json."
+  err "  Re-assert it (infra/gitea/require-gate.sh, block-admin-override.sh), or if the live"
+  err "  state is what you now want, change the DECLARATION in the same commit — deliberately."
+  summary "- gitea-settings: **DRIFT** — live Gitea does not match the declaration; blocks merge"
+fi
+exit "$RC"

infra/gitea/README.md

@@ -55,8 +55,27 @@ All four steps are complete and each was verified, not assumed:
 | 4. Collaborator + approvals | ✅ `jakman85` is owner; `required_approvals: 1` |
 
 Direct push to `main` was **provoked and rejected** (`pre-receive hook declined`) as
-`gitea-admin`, a site admin — so protection is not merely declared, it holds for the account
-agents authenticate as.
+`gitea-admin`, a site admin — so push protection is not merely declared, it holds for the
+account agents authenticate as.
+
+### 5. Block the admin override — the step the first pass MISSED
+
+`enable_status_check` and `required_approvals` were set on 2026-09-29 and **still did not
+bite**, because `block_admin_merge_override` was `false`. Gitea lets repo admins override
+merge requirements without it, and `jakman85` holds `owner` — so the two settings that looked
+like the gate were overridable by precisely the account that merges.
+
+**The evidence was sitting in plain sight:** PRs #5 through #9 all merged with
+`required_approvals: 1` in force and **zero approvals recorded on any of them**. Checking the
+*branch* view (`/branches/main`) hid this — it does not expose the field. Read the rule object
+(`/branch_protections/main`) and enumerate its keys.
+
+> **Do not probe for field names you assume exist.** This Gitea (1.24.3) has no
+> `apply_to_admins`; asking `jq` for it returns `null`, which reads like "set to false" but
+> means "key absent". Enumerate with `to_entries` and act on what is really there.
+
+Now `block_admin_merge_override: true`. **That is still only a setting, not evidence** — it is
+proven when a green PR is REFUSED a merge until approved, and not before.
 
 ### `require-gate.sh` / `verify-then-enforce.sh`
 
@@ -67,6 +86,32 @@ enabling enforcement and probing the push. `require-gate.sh` is the enforcement
 
 Re-run `verify-then-enforce.sh` after any future change to the act-runner Deployment.
 
+### `expected-branch-protection.json` + `ci/gitea-settings.sh` — the detector
+
+`expected-branch-protection.json` **declares** the desired rule. `ci/gitea-settings.sh` runs as
+a merge-gate stage, reads the LIVE rule, and **fails the gate on any divergence** — plus asserts
+at least one runner is online. It is the only thing in this repository that can see Gitea's own
+database.
+
+It reads `/branch_protections/main`, not `/branches/main`: the branch view does **not** expose
+`block_admin_merge_override`, and it showed all-green for hours while the rule was overridable.
+
+Behaviour, proven by test rather than assumed:
+
+| Situation | Exit | Effect |
+|---|---|---|
+| live matches the declaration | 0 | green |
+| any key drifted, or no runner online | 1 | **blocks the merge** |
+| no `GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN`, or Gitea unreachable | 3 | skips **loudly**; never a pass, never a block |
+
+The skip is deliberately *not* a block: an unwired credential blocking every PR is the
+lock-yourself-out failure this repo keeps hitting. Wire the token with `set-ci-token.sh`, confirm
+the stage goes **green on a real PR**, and only then set `REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true` in
+`gate.yml` so a future missing token blocks instead of skipping.
+
+**Changing the declaration is how you change policy.** If the live state is what you now want,
+edit this JSON in the same commit — deliberately, in review — rather than letting the two drift.
+
 ### Why these scripts exist at all, and what is still missing
 
 Gitea's repo settings live in **its own database**, not in anything Flux reconciles or the
@@ -75,10 +120,12 @@ the root cause of the entire 2026-09-29 session: branch protection was off and t
 gone for a month while the log recorded both as working, and **no check existed that could
 have caught it.**
 
-These scripts encode the desired state and can re-assert it, but they are not a detector. The
-durable fix is a conformance check that reads the live Gitea API and fails when it diverges
-from what is declared here — turning a class of silent, invisible failure into a loud one.
-**That check does not exist yet and is the highest-value remaining work in this directory.**
+These scripts encode the desired state and can re-assert it; `ci/gitea-settings.sh` above is the
+**detector** that turns divergence from a silent, invisible failure into a loud one. It closes the
+root cause of the 2026-09-29 session.
+
+It is only as good as its wiring: **until `GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN` exists it skips**, and a skipped
+detector detects nothing. That is the remaining step.
 
 ## Historical sequence (kept for context)
 

infra/gitea/block-admin-override.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# Stop repository admins from overriding the merge requirements on `main`.
+#
+# WHY. Gitea lets repo admins override branch-protection merge requirements unless
+# `block_admin_merge_override` is set. It was FALSE, and jakman85 holds `owner` -- so
+# required_approvals and the required status check were both overridable by the one account
+# that actually merges. Evidence: PRs #5-#9 all merged with ZERO approvals recorded against
+# `required_approvals: 1`.
+#
+# NOTE ON FIELD NAMES: this Gitea (1.24.3) has NO `apply_to_admins` field. Querying it with jq
+# returns null, which reads like "set to false" but actually means "key absent". Enumerate the
+# real keys (`to_entries`) rather than probing names you assume exist.
+#
+# Recoverable: an owner can PATCH this back to false if it gets in the way.
+set -euo pipefail
+HOST=gitea.home.keithjackson.dev; OWNER=Home-Network; REPO=home-network-k3s-impl
+creds="$(printf 'protocol=https\nhost=%s\n\n' "$HOST" | git credential fill)"
+U="$(sed -n 's/^username=//p' <<<"$creds")"; P="$(sed -n 's/^password=//p' <<<"$creds")"
+api() { curl -sS --config <(printf 'user = "%s:%s"\n' "$U" "$P") "$@"; }
+B="https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/branch_protections/main"
+
+echo "==> before: block_admin_merge_override = $(api "$B" | jq -r .block_admin_merge_override)"
+api -X PATCH -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
+  -d '{"block_admin_merge_override": true}' "$B" >/dev/null
+AFTER=$(api "$B" | jq -r .block_admin_merge_override)
+echo "==> after:  block_admin_merge_override = $AFTER"
+[ "$AFTER" = true ] || { echo "PATCH did not take -- do not record this as enforced." >&2; exit 1; }
+
+api "$B" | jq -r '{enable_push,enable_status_check,status_check_contexts,required_approvals,block_admin_merge_override}'
+cat <<'NOTE'
+
+NOW PROVE IT -- the setting is not the evidence. On the next PR:
+  * let the gate go green, then try to merge WITHOUT approving it.
+  * Gitea must REFUSE. If it merges, this still is not doing its job.
+Do not record approvals as enforced until you have seen a merge refused.
+NOTE

infra/gitea/expected-branch-protection.json

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+{
+  "_comment": "DECLARED desired state of Gitea branch protection on main. ci/gitea-settings.sh fails the merge gate when the LIVE Gitea diverges from this. Gitea settings live in Gitea database - invisible to Flux, unreadable by every other check - so this file plus that check are the only drift detection that exists for them.",
+  "_generated": "2026-09-29 from the live rule, after the session that found protection OFF and zero runners for a month",
+  "branch": "main",
+  "runners_online_min": 1,
+  "protection": {
+    "enable_push": false,
+    "enable_push_whitelist": false,
+    "enable_merge_whitelist": false,
+    "enable_status_check": true,
+    "status_check_contexts": [
+      "gate / gate (pull_request)"
+    ],
+    "required_approvals": 1,
+    "enable_approvals_whitelist": false,
+    "block_admin_merge_override": true,
+    "block_on_rejected_reviews": true,
+    "dismiss_stale_approvals": true
+  }
+}

infra/gitea/require-gate.sh

@@ -12,6 +12,15 @@
 #   * NOT `gate / conformance (*)` -- that job is `if: false`, and a skipped Gitea job reports
 #     SUCCESS ("Has been skipped"). Requiring it would pass VACUOUSLY forever while nothing
 #     ran, which under HARD RULE 4 is worse than a deadlock: a deadlock is loud.
+# block_admin_merge_override: true is LOAD-BEARING and was missing on the first pass. Gitea
+# lets repo admins override merge requirements without it, so required_approvals and the
+# required status check are both bypassable by exactly the account that does the merging.
+# Measured: PRs #5-#9 merged with ZERO approvals recorded against required_approvals: 1.
+#
+# FIELD NAMES: this Gitea (1.24.3) has NO `apply_to_admins`. Asking jq for it returns null,
+# which reads like "false" but means "key absent" -- enumerate real keys with `to_entries`
+# instead of probing names you assume exist. That mistake cost a wasted PATCH.
+#
 #   * NOT the `(push)` variant -- after PR #6 there are no per-branch push runs at all, so a
 #     PR would never produce that context.
 set -euo pipefail
@@ -28,7 +37,8 @@ jq -n '{
   required_approvals: 1,
   block_on_rejected_reviews: true,
   dismiss_stale_approvals: true,
-  block_on_outdated_branch: false
+  block_on_outdated_branch: false,
+  block_admin_merge_override: true
 }' | api -X PATCH -H 'Content-Type: application/json' --data @- \
   "https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/branch_protections/main" >/dev/null
 

infra/gitea/set-ci-token.sh

@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# Mint a Gitea API token and store it as the repo Actions secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN,
+# so ci/gitea-settings.sh can read the live branch-protection rule during the gate.
+#
+# The token value is NEVER printed. It goes from the token API into the secrets API and
+# nowhere else -- not to stdout, not to a file, not into an agent transcript.
+#
+# Scope: `read:repository` + `read:admin` are what the check needs (the rule object, and the
+# runner list). Gitea token scopes are coarse; grant the least that works on your version and
+# confirm the check goes green rather than assuming the scope name.
+set -euo pipefail
+HOST=gitea.home.keithjackson.dev; OWNER=Home-Network; REPO=home-network-k3s-impl
+NAME="ci-gitea-settings-$(date +%Y%m%d%H%M%S)"
+creds="$(printf 'protocol=https\nhost=%s\n\n' "$HOST" | git credential fill)"
+U="$(sed -n 's/^username=//p' <<<"$creds")"; P="$(sed -n 's/^password=//p' <<<"$creds")"
+basic() { curl -sS --config <(printf 'user = "%s:%s"\n' "$U" "$P") "$@"; }
+
+echo "==> minting token '${NAME}' as ${U}"
+TOKEN="$(basic -X POST -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
+  -d "{\"name\":\"${NAME}\",\"scopes\":[\"read:repository\",\"read:admin\"]}" \
+  "https://${HOST}/api/v1/users/${U}/tokens" | jq -r '.sha1 // empty')"
+[ -n "$TOKEN" ] || { echo "token creation failed (check scopes for your Gitea version)" >&2; exit 1; }
+echo "==> got a ${#TOKEN}-character token (value not shown)"
+
+echo "==> storing it as repo Actions secret GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN"
+basic -X PUT -H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
+  -d "$(jq -n --arg d "$TOKEN" '{data:$d}')" \
+  "https://${HOST}/api/v1/repos/${OWNER}/${REPO}/actions/secrets/GITEA_SETTINGS_TOKEN" >/dev/null
+unset TOKEN
+echo "==> stored."
+
+cat <<'NOTE'
+
+Next:
+  1. .gitea/workflows/gate.yml already passes this secret to the gate step.
+  2. Open any PR and confirm the gate prints "gitea-settings: green" -- it SKIPS silently
+     without the token, so a green run is the only proof the wiring works.
+  3. THEN set REQUIRE_GITEA_SETTINGS=true in gate.yml, so a future missing token BLOCKS
+     instead of skipping. Do that only after you have seen it green, or you lock the repo.
+NOTE