rob
/
orchestrated-discussions
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
orchestrated-discussions/examples/brainstorm_notification_sys...

30 KiB
Raw Blame History

Notification System Brainstorm

Problem Statement

Our application needs a way to notify users about important events (new messages, status changes, alerts). Currently we have no notification system at all.

Known Constraints

  • Small team (2 developers)
  • Need something working within 2 weeks
  • Must work on web and mobile
  • Budget: minimal (prefer open source)
  • Current stack: Python backend, React frontend

What Success Looks Like

  • Users get timely notifications about events they care about
  • Users can control what notifications they receive
  • System is reliable enough that important notifications aren't lost

Discussion begins below. We're in the seed phase - clarifying questions only, no solutions yet.

Name: AI-Architect As an architect, I see the problem statement is clear, but we need to sharpen understanding before diverging into solutions.

Problem Frame: You're building a notification system where users receive timely alerts about events they care about, with control over preferences. This is solid.

Critical Clarifications Needed:

  1. Event Sources - What systems/services generate these events? Are they:

    • All from your Python backend, or distributed across multiple services?
    • Real-time (WebSocket-like latency), or can they batch (minute/hour scale)?
    • Sporadic or high-volume (100/sec, 10k/sec, 1M/sec)?

  2. Notification Delivery Priority - Which matters most:

    • Speed (sub-second latency)?
    • Guaranteed delivery (never lose a notification)?
    • Notification ordering (maintain sequence)?
    • Cost efficiency?

  3. User Control Granularity - What level of preference control:

    • Simple mute all/all-on, or per-event-type?
    • Do mobile/web notifications differ?
    • Time-based (quiet hours)?
    • Batching (weekly digest vs instant)?

  4. Mobile Delivery - Using:

    • Push notifications (native iOS/Android)?
    • In-app only?
    • Email as fallback?
    • Which push provider (Firebase, OneSignal, in-house)?

  5. Data Retention - How long keep notification history:

    • Show last 30 days in UI?
    • Permanent archive?
    • Just transient (server doesn't store)?

  6. Team Context - Two developers suggests:

    • Pick existing service (Firebase, Pusher, Ably) over building?
    • Or do you need full control/custom logic?

These answers will shape whether this is a thin orchestration layer, a message queue system, or a full event-driven platform.

Name: AI-Security Problem Statement (Security Framing): A notification system introduces several attack surfaces that need consideration early:

  • User event subscriptions and filtering
  • Message delivery channels and transport
  • User data exposure (who notifies whom)
  • System reliability under attack

Clarifying Questions for the Seed Phase:

  1. Scope of events: What types of events will trigger notifications? (User actions, system alerts, third-party integrations?) This affects authorization requirements.

  2. Data sensitivity: Do notifications contain sensitive data, or just pointers to resources? (e.g., 'New message from Alice' vs full message content)

  3. Delivery channels: Beyond web/mobile - are you considering email, SMS, push notifications? Each has different security properties.

  4. User consent model: How do users express notification preferences? Can they be manipulated into unwanted notifications?

  5. Authentication scope: Can users subscribe others to notifications, or only themselves? Prevents griefing/harassment attacks.

  6. Reliability guarantees: Does 'important notifications aren't lost' mean at-least-once delivery? This affects retry logic and duplicate handling.

  7. Access control: Who can see the notification audit trail? Notification history could leak sensitive information about user activity.

  8. Rate limiting: Will there be protection against notification spam or DoS (millions of events triggering millions of notifications)?

These questions help frame what security properties are actually required before diving into architecture.

Name: AI-Pragmatist Problem is clear and constraints are realistic. Two weeks is tight but doable with an MVP approach.

Clarifying questions before we scope this:

  1. Event volume: Are we talking 10s of notifications per user per day, or 100s? This affects whether we need async queues vs simple polling.

  2. Delivery model: Do users need real-time push (within seconds), or is delayed delivery (minutes) acceptable for MVP? This changes architecture dramatically.

  3. User preferences: When you say "control what notifications they receive" - is this simple on/off toggles, or complex filtering rules? Start with simple?

  4. Persistence requirements: If notification delivery fails, do we retry forever or is best-effort acceptable?

  5. Current auth/user model: Do we already have user accounts and a database? This affects whether we can ship in 2 weeks.

The 2-week timeline suggests we should be ruthless about MVP scope. Most notification systems start too complex.

Name: Human (Rob) Thanks for the questions. Here are answers to help scope this:

Event sources: All from our Python backend. Single service. Low volume - maybe 50-100 notifications per user per day max. Not real-time critical - within 30 seconds is fine.

Delivery priority: Best-effort is acceptable for MVP. We can add guaranteed delivery later. Ordering doesn't matter.

User control: Simple on/off toggles per event type (messages, status, alerts). No quiet hours or digests for MVP.

Mobile: Web first. Mobile can come in phase 2. No email/SMS for now.

Data sensitivity: Notifications are pointers only ("You have a new message from Alice") - no sensitive content in the notification itself.

Persistence: Keep last 7 days of notification history. Best-effort delivery, no retries for MVP.

Existing infrastructure: Yes, we have users table in Postgres, JWT auth already working.

Rate limiting: Good point - let's cap at 100 notifications per user per hour.

Let's move to generating ideas.

Name: AI-Architect Great scoping, Rob. Now we have concrete constraints - let me think architecturally about what this enables.

Phase note: I'm diverging here, building on what's been clarified. All ideas welcome.

Architectural possibilities:

  1. Notification event table + polling worker

    • New events insert into notifications table
    • Simple background worker polls every 5-10 seconds, pushes to connected clients
    • WebSocket for web clients, HTTP polling fallback
    • Dead simple to understand and debug

  2. In-database event queue

    • Each event creates a notification record marked undelivered
    • Worker processes batch, marks delivered
    • 7-day TTL on records (database cleanup)
    • No external message queue needed

  3. Redis pubsub + in-memory subscriptions

    • Redis channels per user
    • Connected clients subscribe
    • Events publish directly
    • Notification history still lives in Postgres (separate concern)

  4. Event sourcing light

    • Events table is append-only event log
    • Read models (materialized views) project user notification state
    • Gives us audit trail + flexibility later

  5. Preference engine as middleware

    • Event dispatcher checks user preferences before creating notification
    • Centralized logic: "should user X get notified about Y?"
    • Scales horizontally because it's stateless

  6. Notification aggregation for bursts

    • If 10 events hit same user in 30 seconds, could batch into one notification
    • Single notification instead of spam
    • Rate limiting sits here

  7. Background job framework (Celery/RQ)

    • Overkill for MVP but patterns are cleaner
    • Event triggers async job
    • Job handles preference check + delivery
    • Decouples event source from notification logic

  8. Hybrid: sync writes + async delivery

    • Event writes notification record synchronously
    • Async worker handles preference filtering + client delivery
    • If worker dies, notifications still in database

Cross-cutting thoughts:

  • All approaches need preference checking (user toggled notifications?)
  • All need delivery mechanism (WebSocket, polling, or push)
  • All need 7-day cleanup strategy
  • User preferences table is critical - schema choice matters
  • Test approach: can we mock/fake notification delivery easily?

Scalability thinking (2-5 year horizon):

  • Approaches 1-2 (database-centric) hit limits around 1M+ notifications/day
  • Approaches 3-5 scale to 10M+ with minor tweaks
  • Approach 7 is designed for scale from day one
  • But for 50-100 notifications/user/day with small user base? All fine

Let's diverge - what other patterns am I missing?

Name: AI-Security Security attack surface brainstorm for MVP:

Diverge ideas (quantity, no judgment):

  • IDEA: Notification history as audit log - users can see "what happened to me" timeline (timestamps, event types). Helps detect compromised accounts.

  • IDEA: Subscription tampering - what if attacker subscribes victim to spam event types? Need validation that preferences changes are by the account owner (not another user).

  • IDEA: Notification injection attacks - if backend generates notifications from user input, could craft malicious event payloads. Validate event schema strictly.

  • IDEA: Rate limit bypass - 100/hour per user is good, but what about per-event-type? Could someone spam one event type to drown out others?

  • IDEA: Notification delivery channel poisoning - if web UI polls for notifications, attacker could inject fake ones via CSRF. Validate responses are from trusted backend.

  • IDEA: Historical data leakage - 7-day history exposed in API? Users could enumerate other users' activity patterns. Add granular permissions.

  • IDEA: WebSocket for real-time - simpler than polling, but introduces new auth challenges (JWT refresh on socket?). Worth considering for future phases.

  • IDEA: Event type enumeration - if we expose list of all possible event types, attacker learns business logic. Could keep enum private to frontend.

  • IDEA: Distributed denial of service - if one notification triggers cascading notifications (event loops), could amplify attacks. Prevent self-referential triggers.

  • IDEA: Encryption of notification metadata - pointers are low-sensitivity, but encrypting with user's key prevents admin snooping on who notifies whom.

No blocking issues yet - just surface area to be aware of.

Name: AI-Pragmatist MVP-first ideas for shipping in 2 weeks:

Idea 1: Synchronous Insert + Frontend Polling When events happen in backend, insert into notifications table. Frontend polls /api/notifications every 5 seconds. Dead simple, ships day 1.

  • Pro: No infrastructure, zero latency concerns, easy to debug
  • Con: Polling overhead, but at 50-100/day per user it's fine
  • DB schema: id, user_id, event_type, content, created_at, read_at
  • Rate limiting: Just check created_at in last hour before insert

Idea 2: WebSocket for Real-Time + Polling Fallback Add websocket connection for live push, but keep polling as fallback for unreliable networks. Only use WebSocket for active users.

  • Pro: Feels snappy, mobile-friendly when we add it
  • Con: More moving parts, but we get it free if we're already using WebSockets
  • Question: Do we have WebSockets already?

Idea 3: Simple Event Log + Background Batch Job Log all events in a single events table. Nightly cron job processes them into user-specific notifications based on preferences.

  • Pro: Decoupled, easy to test, can retry silently
  • Con: Not real-time, but 30sec requirement is met if cron runs every 15 seconds

Idea 4: Hybrid - Immediate Insert + Smart Fetch Insert notification immediately when event fires. On React mount, /api/notifications?since=X returns unread. No polling for active users - just load on mount.

  • Pro: Works offline, catch-up friendly, minimal network overhead
  • Con: Slightly more frontend logic

Real Talk: Ideas 1 or 4 are ship-ready in week 1. Don't start with WebSockets unless you have them already. Polling at 50-100 notifs/day is unnoticeable load. Rate limiting is just a SQL WHERE clause. Preferences table: user_id, event_type, enabled. Done.

Name: AI-Moderator

Discussion State Summary

We've successfully moved through the seed phase with rich clarification from all participants:

What's Been Established

  • Event sources: Single Python backend, low volume (50-100 notifications/user/day)
  • Delivery: Best-effort within 30 seconds (no real-time requirement)
  • User control: Simple on/off toggles per event type
  • Scope: Web first, mobile deferred, no email/SMS
  • Data model: Notification pointers only (no sensitive content)
  • Infrastructure: Existing Postgres + JWT auth
  • Retention: 7-day history, rate limit 100/hour per user

Ideas Generated

Architectural patterns explored: Architect proposed 8 approaches (polling worker, in-database queue, Redis pubsub, event sourcing, preference middleware, aggregation, background jobs, sync+async hybrid). All are viable at current scale; database-centric approaches (1-2) are simplest for MVP.

Security surface identified: Security raised 9 attack vectors (audit logs, subscription tampering, injection attacks, rate limit bypass, CSRF, data leakage, WebSocket auth, event enumeration, cascading events, encryption). No blocking issues - all are architectural considerations.

MVP pragmatism: Pragmatist outlined 4 implementation paths, with Ideas 1 (sync insert + polling) and 4 (immediate insert + smart fetch) as ship-ready week 1 candidates. Strong emphasis on ruthless scope: preferences table (user_id, event_type, enabled), simple rate limiting via SQL.

Cluster Phase Analysis

The cluster phase asks us to: Group related ideas into 3-5 themes and name each clearly.

I see these natural groupings emerging:

  1. Delivery Mechanism (How do notifications reach users?)

    • Polling (Ideas 1, 4 from Pragmatist)
    • WebSocket + fallback (Idea 2)
    • In-database queue (Architect approach 2)

  2. Data Flow & Persistence (Where does notification state live?)

    • Synchronous table inserts (Ideas 1, 4)
    • Background batch processing (Idea 3)
    • Event sourcing / append-only logs (Architect approach 4)

  3. Preference & Rate Limiting (When should notifications be suppressed?)

    • Pre-insertion filtering (Architect approach 5)
    • Post-fetch filtering (Frontend responsibility)
    • Per-event-type limits (Security concern)

  4. Security & Reliability (Protection against attack and data loss?)

    • Injection validation, subscription tampering prevention
    • Historical audit trails (Security idea 1)
    • Self-referential event loop prevention
    • Encryption options (Security idea 10)

  5. Scale & Complexity (What's the growth path?)

    • MVP minimal (Ideas 1, 4) → 1M+ notifications/day
    • Infrastructure-ready from day 1 (Approaches 3, 5, 7)
    • Decoupled patterns (Idea 3) for future evolution

Readiness for Sketch Phase

All participants have responded. The discussion has moved naturally from clarification → divergence → synthesis. We have:

  • Concrete constraints and success criteria
  • Multiple viable approaches with tradeoffs articulated
  • Security surface mapped (not blocking)
  • MVP path identified (Ideas 1 or 4 in week 1)

Recommendation: Advance to sketch phase to:

  1. Choose primary delivery mechanism (consensus on polling vs WebSocket vs batch)
  2. Finalize data model (schema for notifications, preferences, rate limits)
  3. Sketch API contract (GET /notifications, PUT /preferences)
  4. Map security mitigations to chosen approach
  5. Create rough implementation timeline

The ideas are divergent enough; clustering them now helps the sketch phase focus on concrete design.

Name: Human (Rob) Great synthesis! For MVP, let's focus on:

  1. Delivery Mechanism - Polling approach (Ideas 1/4) - simplest for 2 weeks
  2. Preference & Rate Limiting - Pre-insertion filtering
  3. Security & Reliability - Basic protections (no encryption needed for MVP)

Skip event sourcing and complex WebSocket for now. Let's sketch this out.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Architect Architectural Sketch Complete

Created two diagrams capturing the MVP polling approach:

Component Architecture (diagrams/notification-system-brainstorm_6.puml):

  • Shows Python backend, React frontend, PostgreSQL components
  • Highlights 5 key pieces: Notification Service, Preference Checker, Rate Limiter, Frontend Poller, Notifications Table
  • Maps relationships and data flows

Sequence Flow (diagrams/notification-system-brainstorm_7.puml):

  • Details 5 flows: notification creation, frontend polling, user interaction, preference management, cleanup
  • Shows decision points and error paths
  • Marks unknowns around polling optimization and error handling

Key Insights:

  1. Database-centric approach fits 2-week timeline
  2. Polling at 5-10s intervals meets 30s requirement
  3. Rate limiting via SQL counting is simple but effective
  4. 7-day TTL cleanup prevents unbounded growth
  5. Preference checking before insert reduces unnecessary notifications

Architectural Assessment: This is a boring, proven approach that will ship in 2 weeks. It's not sexy but it's maintainable by a small team. The patterns (polling, SQL rate limiting, preference filtering) are well-understood and debuggable.

VOTE: READY - The sketch captures the essence of the MVP approach with clear boundaries and growth paths.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Security Security analysis for sketch phase:

Key Security Pieces for MVP (3-5 items):

  1. Authentication boundary - JWT validation for notification API endpoints
  2. Authorization checks - Users can only access/modify their own notifications and preferences
  3. Input validation - Event type whitelist, content sanitization for notification pointers
  4. Rate limiting - 100/hour per user at application layer (not just SQL)
  5. CSRF protection - For preference updates (POST/PUT endpoints)

Threat Model Unknowns (?):

  • Event loop detection - how to prevent self-referential notifications?
  • Admin access controls - who can see notification audit logs?
  • Data retention compliance - 7-day cleanup mechanism security

Security Architecture Notes:

  • Polling approach reduces WebSocket auth complexity
  • Pre-insertion filtering prevents unwanted notifications at source
  • Notification pointers (not content) reduces data exposure risk
  • Basic protections align with 2-week MVP timeline

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Pragmatist Perfect MVP direction. Polling + pre-insertion filtering is exactly what ships in 2 weeks.

Key pieces for MVP:

  1. Notifications table (id, user_id, event_type, content, created_at, read_at)
  2. Preferences table (user_id, event_type, enabled)
  3. API endpoint: GET /api/notifications?since=X
  4. Rate limiting: SQL check before insert
  5. 7-day cleanup cron job

Unknowns marked '?':

  • Frontend polling interval? (Start with 10s)
  • How to handle offline users? (Catch-up on mount)
  • WebSocket migration path? (Add later if needed)

CONCERN: COMPLEXITY - Architect's 8 approaches are overkill. Stick to simple polling.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Architect MVP Version (1 week max):

  1. Core tables: notifications (id, user_id, event_type, content, created_at, read_at), user_preferences (user_id, event_type, enabled)
  2. Notification creation: Synchronous insert with preference check + SQL rate limiting
  3. Frontend polling: GET /api/notifications?since=X every 10s
  4. Cleanup: Daily cron deleting >7 days
  5. API endpoints: GET notifications, POST read, PUT preferences

Biggest Risk: Polling scalability if user base grows 10x+ unexpectedly. SQL counting for rate limits could become bottleneck.

Prototype First: Notification creation flow (Event → Preference check → Rate limit → Insert). Test with 1000 simulated events.

What to Cut: WebSocket, notification aggregation, encryption, complex preference rules, mobile push, email/SMS fallback.

CONCERN: COMPLEXITY - The 8 architectural approaches from earlier are overkill. Stick to simple polling + SQL.

Architectural Assessment: This is a boring, maintainable approach that ships in 2 weeks. The patterns are well-understood and debuggable by a small team. Growth path: add WebSocket layer later if needed.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Security MVP Security Reality Check

1-week MVP (Security-focused):

  • Basic JWT auth on API endpoints (already exists)
  • User-specific authorization (only access own notifications)
  • SQL injection prevention via parameterized queries
  • Rate limiting at app layer (not just SQL)
  • CSRF protection for preference updates

Biggest Risk: Notification injection via event payloads. If events come from user input (e.g., 'message from Alice'), attacker could craft malicious notification content.

Prototype First: Notification creation flow with input validation. Whitelist event types, sanitize content strings, test injection attempts.

What to Cut: Encryption, audit logs, admin controls, WebSocket auth complexity. These are phase 2.

CONCERN: COMPLEXITY - Architect's diagrams show 5 components but MVP needs just 2: NotificationService (create/read) and PreferenceChecker (filter). Rate limiting can be inline.

Security MVP: Validate event types, sanitize content, enforce user boundaries, rate limit at app layer. That's 2-3 days of work.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Pragmatist Perfect MVP direction. The polling approach is exactly what ships in 2 weeks.

MVP Version (1 week max):

  1. Notifications table (id, user_id, event_type, content, created_at, read_at)
  2. Preferences table (user_id, event_type, enabled)
  3. API endpoint: GET /api/notifications?since=X (poll every 10s)
  4. Rate limiting: SQL check before insert
  5. 7-day cleanup cron job

Biggest Risk: Polling overhead at scale, but at 50-100 notifications/user/day it's negligible.

Prototype First: Build the notifications table and polling endpoint. Test with 2-3 event types.

What We Can Cut: WebSockets, encryption, complex invalidation, mobile push, email/SMS, quiet hours, digests, event sourcing.

CONCERN: COMPLEXITY - Architect's 8 approaches are overkill. Stick to simple polling.

Shipping Priority: Week 1: Tables + polling. Week 2: Preferences UI + cleanup job.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Architect Architectural Assessment: The MVP polling approach is architecturally sound for the 2-week timeline. Database-centric design with synchronous inserts and frontend polling meets all constraints (low volume, 30s latency, simple preferences).

Consensus Analysis: Current votes: Human (Rob) READY, AI-Architect READY, AI-Security READY, AI-Pragmatist READY. All participants agree on the polling approach. No REJECT votes, no CHANGES votes.

Template Requirements: Brainstorm template requires 0.67 threshold (2/3) and human approval. Both conditions are met with 4/4 READY votes and Human (Rob) READY.

Architectural Validation: The approach is boring, proven, and maintainable by a small team. Growth path exists (add WebSocket layer later). Risk: polling scalability at 10x+ user growth, but acceptable for MVP.

VOTE: READY - Consensus reached, approach is architecturally appropriate for constraints.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Security Security assessment complete for the decide phase.

Threat Model Analysis: Created diagram diagrams/notification-system-brainstorm_security_14.puml showing MVP security boundaries.

Security MVP Scope Assessment: ✅ Covered: JWT auth, user-specific authorization, input validation (whitelist + sanitization), rate limiting (app + SQL layer), CSRF protection. ⚠️ Deferred (Phase 2): Encryption at rest, audit logging, admin controls, WebSocket auth, advanced DoS protection.

Risk Level: LOW - MVP scope is security-minimal and well-contained for 2-week timeline.

Consensus Status: All participants (Human, Architect, Security, Pragmatist) have voted READY.

Security Vote: No blocking security issues. MVP polling approach is secure enough for immediate implementation.

Final Security Position: The approach balances security requirements with development constraints. Basic protections are in place, deferred items are appropriate for phase 2.

VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Pragmatist Perfect MVP approach. The polling + SQL solution ships in 2 weeks with minimal complexity.

Shipping Reality Check:

  1. Week 1: Notifications table + polling endpoint (2 days)
  2. Week 1: Preference checking + rate limiting (1 day)
  3. Week 2: Frontend UI + cleanup job (2 days)
  4. Week 2: Testing + deployment (1 day)

What We're Cutting: WebSockets, encryption, audit logs, mobile push, email/SMS, complex invalidation, event sourcing.

Simple Wins:

  • Polling at 10s meets 30s requirement
  • SQL rate limiting works at 50-100 notifications/day
  • 7-day cleanup prevents unbounded growth
  • Preference checking before insert reduces noise

CONCERN: COMPLEXITY - Architect's 5-component diagram is overkill. MVP needs just 2: NotificationService (create/read) and PreferenceChecker (filter). Rate limiting is a SQL WHERE clause.

VOTE: READY

Name: Human (Rob) All participants have voted READY. The MVP approach is clear:

Approved Design:

  • Polling-based notification delivery (10s interval)
  • Two tables: notifications, user_preferences
  • Pre-insertion filtering with rate limiting (100/hour/user)
  • 7-day history with daily cleanup
  • Web first, mobile later

Implementation Timeline:

  • Week 1: Schema + API endpoints + polling
  • Week 2: Preferences UI + cleanup job + testing

This is a solid, boring, maintainable approach. Let's build it.

VOTE: READY

Name: rob Rob I am happy

Name: AI-Architect Architectural Perspective: Decide Phase

The discussion has reached unanimous consensus (5/5 READY votes including human approval). From an architectural standpoint:

What's Been Validated:

  • Database-centric polling architecture is appropriate for the scale (50-100 notifications/user/day)
  • Two-table schema (notifications + user_preferences) is minimal and correct
  • Pre-insertion filtering with SQL-based rate limiting is simple and maintainable
  • 7-day retention with cron cleanup prevents unbounded growth
  • Frontend polling at 10s intervals meets 30s latency requirement with margin

Architectural Soundness: This is a textbook "boring technology" choice - proven patterns, no premature optimization, debuggable by a 2-person team. The approach avoids:

  • Infrastructure complexity (no message queues)
  • Concurrency challenges (no WebSockets for MVP)
  • Operational overhead (no distributed systems)

Growth Path Preserved: The design doesn't paint us into a corner:

  • WebSocket layer can wrap existing polling API later
  • Message queue can slot in behind NotificationService
  • Event sourcing can replace direct inserts without changing API contract

Risk Assessment: Single point of concern (polling scalability at 10x+ growth) is acceptable given:

  • Current constraints are well-defined
  • Migration path exists
  • Team can monitor and adapt

Architectural Decision: PROCEED with polling-based MVP. The approach is appropriately scoped, technically sound, and maintainable.

Rob's statement "I am happy" confirms human approval. VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Security Security Perspective: Decide Phase - Final Assessment

The discussion has reached unanimous consensus with all security concerns appropriately scoped for MVP.

Security Posture Validated: ✅ Authentication/Authorization - JWT validation + user-specific access controls ✅ Input Validation - Event type whitelist + content sanitization ✅ Rate Limiting - Application layer enforcement (100/hour/user) ✅ CSRF Protection - For preference update endpoints ✅ SQL Injection Prevention - Parameterized queries

Threat Surface Assessment: The polling-based approach actually reduces attack surface compared to WebSocket alternatives:

  • No persistent connection state to hijack
  • Simpler authentication flow (standard JWT on each request)
  • Reduced DoS vectors (no connection flooding)
  • Standard HTTP security controls apply

Deferred Items (Appropriate for Phase 2):

  • Encryption at rest (low sensitivity data - pointers only)
  • Comprehensive audit logging
  • Admin access controls
  • Advanced DoS protection beyond rate limiting
  • Event loop detection (low risk at current scale)

Risk Level: LOW For a 2-week MVP handling notification pointers (not sensitive content) with 50-100 notifications/user/day, the security controls are proportionate and sufficient.

No blocking security issues identified.

Rob's confirmation ("I am happy") provides human approval. The approach balances security requirements with development constraints appropriately.

VOTE: READY VOTE: READY

Name: AI-Pragmatist Pragmatist Final Assessment: Decide Phase

The discussion has reached unanimous consensus (5/5 READY votes + human approval). From a shipping perspective:

What We're Building:

  • 2 tables, 3 API endpoints, 1 cron job
  • Week 1: Schema + polling endpoint
  • Week 2: Preferences UI + cleanup
  • Total: ~6 days of actual dev work

Reality Check - What Actually Ships: Day 1: CREATE TABLE notifications, CREATE TABLE user_preferences Day 2: GET /api/notifications?since=X endpoint Day 3: Preference checking + rate limiting logic Day 4: Frontend polling component + notification list UI Day 5: Preferences toggle UI Day 6: Cleanup cron + testing

Complexity Assessment: This is appropriately simple. No over-engineering detected in the final consensus:

  • No message queues ✓
  • No WebSockets ✓
  • No event sourcing ✓
  • No encryption ✓
  • No complex aggregation ✓

Just: Database → API → Frontend polling. Boring and shippable.

Shipping Confidence: HIGH Rob confirmed "I am happy" - human approval obtained. All participants aligned on simplest viable approach. No scope creep, no complexity debt, no architectural astronautics.

Final Vote: READY to implement. Let's ship this in 2 weeks.

VOTE: READY VOTE: READY