Merge branch 'fix/d-008-policy-engine-drift'

api/openapi.yaml

@@ -3461,6 +3461,7 @@ components:
         - RequiredMetadata
         - AllowedEnvironments
         - RenewalLeadTime
+        - CertificateLifetime
 
     PolicySeverity:
       type: string

cmd/server/main.go

@@ -145,6 +145,7 @@ func main() {
 	// Initialize services (following the dependency graph)
 	auditService := service.NewAuditService(auditRepo)
 	policyService := service.NewPolicyService(policyRepo, auditService)
+	policyService.SetCertRepo(certificateRepo) // D-008: CertificateLifetime arm needs CertificateVersion.NotBefore/NotAfter
 	certificateService := service.NewCertificateService(certificateRepo, policyService, auditService)
 	notifierRegistry := make(map[string]service.Notifier)
 

internal/api/handler/validation.go

@@ -71,10 +71,11 @@ func ValidatePolicyType(policyType interface{}) error {
 		"RequiredMetadata":    true,
 		"AllowedEnvironments": true,
 		"RenewalLeadTime":     true,
+		"CertificateLifetime": true,
 	}
 	typeStr := fmt.Sprintf("%v", policyType)
 	if !validTypes[typeStr] {
-		return ValidationError{Field: "type", Message: "type must be one of: AllowedIssuers, AllowedDomains, RequiredMetadata, AllowedEnvironments, RenewalLeadTime"}
+		return ValidationError{Field: "type", Message: "type must be one of: AllowedIssuers, AllowedDomains, RequiredMetadata, AllowedEnvironments, RenewalLeadTime, CertificateLifetime"}
 	}
 	return nil
 }

internal/domain/policy.go

@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ const (
 	PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata     PolicyType = "RequiredMetadata"
 	PolicyTypeAllowedEnvironments  PolicyType = "AllowedEnvironments"
 	PolicyTypeRenewalLeadTime      PolicyType = "RenewalLeadTime"
+	PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime  PolicyType = "CertificateLifetime"
 )
 
 // PolicyViolation records an instance of a certificate violating a policy rule.

internal/service/policy.go

@@ -2,8 +2,10 @@ package service
 
 import (
 	"context"
+	"encoding/json"
 	"fmt"
 	"log/slog"
+	"strings"
 	"time"
 
 	"github.com/shankar0123/certctl/internal/domain"
@@ -14,6 +16,11 @@ import (
 type PolicyService struct {
 	policyRepo   repository.PolicyRepository
 	auditService *AuditService
+	// certRepo is optional and only required by the CertificateLifetime rule
+	// arm, which must read NotBefore/NotAfter from the latest CertificateVersion.
+	// Wire via SetCertRepo after construction; rules other than
+	// CertificateLifetime operate without it.
+	certRepo repository.CertificateRepository
 }
 
 // NewPolicyService creates a new policy service.
@@ -27,6 +34,16 @@ func NewPolicyService(
 	}
 }
 
+// SetCertRepo wires the certificate repository needed for the CertificateLifetime
+// rule arm. Kept as a setter (not a constructor parameter) so the ~36 existing
+// NewPolicyService call sites don't churn for a single new arm's dependency.
+// Safe to call before or after construction; evaluateRule checks for nil and
+// returns an error if a CertificateLifetime rule fires without a wired repo
+// (the caller at ValidateCertificate logs and continues).
+func (s *PolicyService) SetCertRepo(r repository.CertificateRepository) {
+	s.certRepo = r
+}
+
 // ValidateCertificate runs all enabled policy rules against a certificate.
 func (s *PolicyService) ValidateCertificate(ctx context.Context, cert *domain.ManagedCertificate) ([]*domain.PolicyViolation, error) {
 	rules, err := s.policyRepo.ListRules(ctx)
@@ -43,7 +60,7 @@ func (s *PolicyService) ValidateCertificate(ctx context.Context, cert *domain.Ma
 		}
 
 		// Evaluate rule against certificate
-		v, err := s.evaluateRule(rule, cert)
+		v, err := s.evaluateRule(ctx, rule, cert)
 		if err != nil {
 			slog.Error("failed to evaluate rule", "rule_id", rule.ID, "error", err)
 			continue
@@ -58,73 +75,163 @@ func (s *PolicyService) ValidateCertificate(ctx context.Context, cert *domain.Ma
 }
 
 // evaluateRule checks if a certificate violates a single policy rule.
-func (s *PolicyService) evaluateRule(rule *domain.PolicyRule, cert *domain.ManagedCertificate) (*domain.PolicyViolation, error) {
+//
+// D-008 closes the engine loop by:
+//  1. Consuming rule.Severity on every violation (the pre-D-008 engine
+//     hardcoded PolicySeverityWarning, which silently defeated the D-006
+//     per-rule severity column).
+//  2. Parsing rule.Config per-arm so rules carry real thresholds / allowlists
+//     instead of the pre-D-008 "metadata absent" placeholders. Empty/null
+//     Config preserves the pre-D-008 missing-field behavior as a
+//     backward-compat invariant — a rule without config still fires on the
+//     absent-field shape but using its configured severity.
+//  3. Adding the CertificateLifetime arm, which reads NotBefore/NotAfter from
+//     the latest CertificateVersion (injected via SetCertRepo). Required
+//     because ManagedCertificate tracks ExpiresAt but not issuance date.
+//
+// Bad-config failure mode: json.Unmarshal error returns (nil, error) shaped
+// as `invalid config for rule <id> (type=<type>): <err>`; the caller at
+// ValidateCertificate logs and continues so one malformed rule doesn't fail
+// the entire pass.
+func (s *PolicyService) evaluateRule(ctx context.Context, rule *domain.PolicyRule, cert *domain.ManagedCertificate) (*domain.PolicyViolation, error) {
 	switch rule.Type {
 	case domain.PolicyTypeAllowedIssuers:
-		// Restrict to specific issuers
-		// Note: In a production implementation, we would parse rule.Config to extract parameters
+		// Config: {"allowed_issuer_ids": ["iss-a", "iss-b"]}
+		// Empty config = fire only on absent IssuerID (backward-compat).
+		var cfg struct {
+			AllowedIssuerIDs []string `json:"allowed_issuer_ids"`
+		}
+		if len(rule.Config) > 0 {
+			if err := json.Unmarshal(rule.Config, &cfg); err != nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid config for rule %s (type=%s): %w", rule.ID, rule.Type, err)
+			}
+		}
 		if cert.IssuerID == "" {
-			return &domain.PolicyViolation{
-				ID:            generateID("violation"),
-				RuleID:        rule.ID,
-				CertificateID: cert.ID,
-				Severity:      domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
-				Message:       "certificate has no issuer assigned",
-				CreatedAt:     time.Now(),
-			}, nil
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, "certificate has no issuer assigned"), nil
+		}
+		if len(cfg.AllowedIssuerIDs) > 0 && !containsString(cfg.AllowedIssuerIDs, cert.IssuerID) {
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, fmt.Sprintf("issuer %q is not in the allowed list", cert.IssuerID)), nil
 		}
 
 	case domain.PolicyTypeAllowedDomains:
-		// Ensure certificate domains are in allowed list
+		// Config: {"allowed_domains": ["example.com", "*.internal.example.com"]}
+		// Wildcards are literal prefix matches (*.foo matches anything ending
+		// in .foo). Empty config = fire only on zero SANs (backward-compat).
+		var cfg struct {
+			AllowedDomains []string `json:"allowed_domains"`
+		}
+		if len(rule.Config) > 0 {
+			if err := json.Unmarshal(rule.Config, &cfg); err != nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid config for rule %s (type=%s): %w", rule.ID, rule.Type, err)
+			}
+		}
 		if len(cert.SANs) == 0 {
-			return &domain.PolicyViolation{
-				ID:            generateID("violation"),
-				RuleID:        rule.ID,
-				CertificateID: cert.ID,
-				Severity:      domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
-				Message:       "certificate has no subject alternative names",
-				CreatedAt:     time.Now(),
-			}, nil
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, "certificate has no subject alternative names"), nil
+		}
+		if len(cfg.AllowedDomains) > 0 {
+			for _, san := range cert.SANs {
+				if !domainAllowed(san, cfg.AllowedDomains) {
+					return s.violation(rule, cert, fmt.Sprintf("SAN %q is not in the allowed domain list", san)), nil
+				}
+			}
 		}
 
 	case domain.PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata:
-		// Ensure certificate has required metadata/tags
+		// Config: {"required_keys": ["owner", "cost-center"]}
+		// Empty config = fire only on zero tags (backward-compat).
+		var cfg struct {
+			RequiredKeys []string `json:"required_keys"`
+		}
+		if len(rule.Config) > 0 {
+			if err := json.Unmarshal(rule.Config, &cfg); err != nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid config for rule %s (type=%s): %w", rule.ID, rule.Type, err)
+			}
+		}
 		if len(cert.Tags) == 0 {
-			return &domain.PolicyViolation{
-				ID:            generateID("violation"),
-				RuleID:        rule.ID,
-				CertificateID: cert.ID,
-				Severity:      domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
-				Message:       "certificate has no tags or metadata",
-				CreatedAt:     time.Now(),
-			}, nil
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, "certificate has no tags or metadata"), nil
+		}
+		for _, key := range cfg.RequiredKeys {
+			if _, ok := cert.Tags[key]; !ok {
+				return s.violation(rule, cert, fmt.Sprintf("certificate is missing required metadata key %q", key)), nil
+			}
 		}
 
 	case domain.PolicyTypeAllowedEnvironments:
-		// Restrict to specific environments
+		// Config: {"allowed": ["prod", "staging"]}
+		// Empty config = fire only on empty Environment (backward-compat).
+		var cfg struct {
+			Allowed []string `json:"allowed"`
+		}
+		if len(rule.Config) > 0 {
+			if err := json.Unmarshal(rule.Config, &cfg); err != nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid config for rule %s (type=%s): %w", rule.ID, rule.Type, err)
+			}
+		}
 		if cert.Environment == "" {
-			return &domain.PolicyViolation{
-				ID:            generateID("violation"),
-				RuleID:        rule.ID,
-				CertificateID: cert.ID,
-				Severity:      domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
-				Message:       "certificate has no environment assigned",
-				CreatedAt:     time.Now(),
-			}, nil
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, "certificate has no environment assigned"), nil
+		}
+		if len(cfg.Allowed) > 0 && !containsString(cfg.Allowed, cert.Environment) {
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, fmt.Sprintf("environment %q is not in the allowed list", cert.Environment)), nil
 		}
 
 	case domain.PolicyTypeRenewalLeadTime:
-		// Ensure renewal begins before certificate expires
+		// Config: {"lead_time_days": 30}
+		// Fires when remaining validity drops below lead_time_days and the
+		// cert is not already expired. Empty/zero config falls back to the
+		// pre-D-008 hardcoded 30-day threshold for backward compatibility.
+		var cfg struct {
+			LeadTimeDays int `json:"lead_time_days"`
+		}
+		if len(rule.Config) > 0 {
+			if err := json.Unmarshal(rule.Config, &cfg); err != nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid config for rule %s (type=%s): %w", rule.ID, rule.Type, err)
+			}
+		}
+		leadDays := cfg.LeadTimeDays
+		if leadDays <= 0 {
+			leadDays = 30
+		}
 		daysUntilExpiry := time.Until(cert.ExpiresAt).Hours() / 24
-		if daysUntilExpiry < 30 && daysUntilExpiry > 0 {
-			return &domain.PolicyViolation{
-				ID:            generateID("violation"),
-				RuleID:        rule.ID,
-				CertificateID: cert.ID,
-				Severity:      domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
-				Message:       fmt.Sprintf("certificate expires in %.1f days, plan renewal soon", daysUntilExpiry),
-				CreatedAt:     time.Now(),
-			}, nil
+		if daysUntilExpiry < float64(leadDays) && daysUntilExpiry > 0 {
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, fmt.Sprintf("certificate expires in %.1f days, plan renewal soon (policy lead time: %d days)", daysUntilExpiry, leadDays)), nil
+		}
+
+	case domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime:
+		// Config: {"max_days": 397}
+		// Reads NotBefore/NotAfter from the latest CertificateVersion via the
+		// injected certRepo. ManagedCertificate exposes ExpiresAt but not the
+		// issuance date, so lifetime math requires the version record.
+		//
+		// If certRepo wasn't wired (test misconfiguration / early boot),
+		// returns an error so the caller logs it — better a loud failure
+		// than silently ignoring the rule. If GetLatestVersion errors (e.g.,
+		// the cert hasn't been issued yet), we skip the check — a cert with
+		// no version has no lifetime to measure, matching the missing-field
+		// backward-compat pattern used by the other arms.
+		if s.certRepo == nil {
+			return nil, fmt.Errorf("CertificateLifetime rule %s requires cert repository (not wired via SetCertRepo)", rule.ID)
+		}
+		var cfg struct {
+			MaxDays int `json:"max_days"`
+		}
+		if len(rule.Config) > 0 {
+			if err := json.Unmarshal(rule.Config, &cfg); err != nil {
+				return nil, fmt.Errorf("invalid config for rule %s (type=%s): %w", rule.ID, rule.Type, err)
+			}
+		}
+		if cfg.MaxDays <= 0 {
+			// No threshold configured — nothing meaningful to enforce.
+			return nil, nil
+		}
+		version, err := s.certRepo.GetLatestVersion(ctx, cert.ID)
+		if err != nil {
+			// No version yet — nothing to measure. Not an engine error;
+			// the cert simply hasn't been issued.
+			return nil, nil
+		}
+		lifetimeDays := version.NotAfter.Sub(version.NotBefore).Hours() / 24
+		if lifetimeDays > float64(cfg.MaxDays) {
+			return s.violation(rule, cert, fmt.Sprintf("certificate lifetime is %.1f days, exceeds policy max of %d days", lifetimeDays, cfg.MaxDays)), nil
 		}
 
 	default:
@@ -134,6 +241,56 @@ func (s *PolicyService) evaluateRule(rule *domain.PolicyRule, cert *domain.Manag
 	return nil, nil
 }
 
+// violation constructs a PolicyViolation carrying the rule's configured
+// severity. Centralizing the build eliminates the pre-D-008 bug where each
+// arm independently stamped PolicySeverityWarning on its violation.
+func (s *PolicyService) violation(rule *domain.PolicyRule, cert *domain.ManagedCertificate, message string) *domain.PolicyViolation {
+	return &domain.PolicyViolation{
+		ID:            generateID("violation"),
+		RuleID:        rule.ID,
+		CertificateID: cert.ID,
+		Severity:      rule.Severity,
+		Message:       message,
+		CreatedAt:     time.Now(),
+	}
+}
+
+// containsString reports whether needle is present in haystack.
+func containsString(haystack []string, needle string) bool {
+	for _, s := range haystack {
+		if s == needle {
+			return true
+		}
+	}
+	return false
+}
+
+// domainAllowed reports whether a SAN (hostname) matches any of the allowed
+// domain patterns. Patterns may be exact matches or `*.example.com` wildcards
+// (the wildcard consumes a single label: `*.foo.com` matches `bar.foo.com`
+// but not `baz.bar.foo.com`, mirroring X.509 SAN wildcard semantics).
+func domainAllowed(san string, allowed []string) bool {
+	san = strings.ToLower(strings.TrimSpace(san))
+	for _, pattern := range allowed {
+		pattern = strings.ToLower(strings.TrimSpace(pattern))
+		if pattern == san {
+			return true
+		}
+		if strings.HasPrefix(pattern, "*.") {
+			suffix := pattern[1:] // ".foo.com"
+			if strings.HasSuffix(san, suffix) {
+				// Ensure wildcard consumes exactly one label — reject
+				// sub-subdomains.
+				head := strings.TrimSuffix(san, suffix)
+				if head != "" && !strings.Contains(head, ".") {
+					return true
+				}
+			}
+		}
+	}
+	return false
+}
+
 // CreateRule stores a new policy rule.
 func (s *PolicyService) CreateRule(ctx context.Context, rule *domain.PolicyRule, actor string) error {
 	if rule.ID == "" {

internal/service/policy_test.go

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ package service
 import (
 	"context"
 	"encoding/json"
+	"strings"
 	"testing"
 	"time"
 
@@ -420,3 +421,536 @@ func TestCreatePolicy(t *testing.T) {
 		t.Errorf("expected 1 rule in repo, got %d", len(policyRepo.Rules))
 	}
 }
+
+// ============================================================================
+// D-008 regression tests
+//
+// These pin the behavior that closes the D-006 loop:
+//   1. evaluateRule copies rule.Severity onto every violation (pre-D-008 the
+//      engine hardcoded Warning regardless of the rule's configured severity).
+//   2. evaluateRule parses rule.Config per-arm so rules enforce real thresholds
+//      and allowlists (pre-D-008 the configs were ignored; rules fired only on
+//      the missing-field shape).
+//   3. An empty/zero Config preserves the pre-D-008 missing-field violation
+//      (backward-compat invariant).
+//   4. Malformed Config returns an error; the caller logs and skips the rule
+//      instead of producing a zero-value violation.
+//   5. CertificateLifetime (new 6th arm) reads NotBefore/NotAfter from the
+//      latest CertificateVersion via the cert repo wired with SetCertRepo.
+// ============================================================================
+
+// mkRule is a tiny constructor used by the D-008 tests to keep the table rows
+// readable. Every rule is enabled; test-specific fields layer on top.
+func mkRule(id string, t domain.PolicyType, sev domain.PolicySeverity, cfg string) *domain.PolicyRule {
+	return &domain.PolicyRule{
+		ID:       id,
+		Name:     id,
+		Type:     t,
+		Config:   json.RawMessage(cfg),
+		Enabled:  true,
+		Severity: sev,
+	}
+}
+
+// evalCert is a minimal cert used by the arms that don't look at much beyond
+// the shape of the field they're testing. Tests shadow fields as needed.
+func evalCert() *domain.ManagedCertificate {
+	return &domain.ManagedCertificate{
+		ID:         "cert-001",
+		CommonName: "example.com",
+		Status:     domain.CertificateStatusActive,
+		ExpiresAt:  time.Now().AddDate(1, 0, 0),
+	}
+}
+
+// TestEvaluateRule_SeverityPassThrough pins invariant #1 — every arm stamps
+// rule.Severity onto the violation. The pre-D-008 bug was that arms
+// independently hardcoded PolicySeverityWarning. We test each arm with a
+// severity that isn't the legacy default so a regression would be visible.
+func TestEvaluateRule_SeverityPassThrough(t *testing.T) {
+	ctx := context.Background()
+
+	// Cert shaped to fail every non-empty-config check via the backward-compat
+	// missing-field path. Each row picks a severity intentionally ≠ Warning to
+	// make a stray hardcoded default obvious.
+	cases := []struct {
+		name     string
+		rule     *domain.PolicyRule
+		cert     *domain.ManagedCertificate
+		setupFn  func(svc *PolicyService)
+		expected domain.PolicySeverity
+	}{
+		{
+			name: "AllowedIssuers Critical via missing IssuerID",
+			rule: mkRule("r-ai", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedIssuers, domain.PolicySeverityCritical, ""),
+			cert: func() *domain.ManagedCertificate {
+				c := evalCert()
+				c.IssuerID = ""
+				return c
+			}(),
+			expected: domain.PolicySeverityCritical,
+		},
+		{
+			name: "AllowedDomains Error via empty SANs",
+			rule: mkRule("r-ad", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedDomains, domain.PolicySeverityError, ""),
+			cert: func() *domain.ManagedCertificate {
+				c := evalCert()
+				c.SANs = nil
+				return c
+			}(),
+			expected: domain.PolicySeverityError,
+		},
+		{
+			name: "RequiredMetadata Critical via empty Tags",
+			rule: mkRule("r-rm", domain.PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata, domain.PolicySeverityCritical, ""),
+			cert: func() *domain.ManagedCertificate {
+				c := evalCert()
+				c.Tags = nil
+				return c
+			}(),
+			expected: domain.PolicySeverityCritical,
+		},
+		{
+			name: "AllowedEnvironments Warning via empty Environment",
+			rule: mkRule("r-ae", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedEnvironments, domain.PolicySeverityWarning, ""),
+			cert: func() *domain.ManagedCertificate {
+				c := evalCert()
+				c.Environment = ""
+				return c
+			}(),
+			expected: domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+		},
+		{
+			name: "RenewalLeadTime Critical via short remaining validity",
+			rule: mkRule("r-rl", domain.PolicyTypeRenewalLeadTime, domain.PolicySeverityCritical, `{"lead_time_days": 60}`),
+			cert: func() *domain.ManagedCertificate {
+				c := evalCert()
+				c.ExpiresAt = time.Now().AddDate(0, 0, 30) // 30d remaining < 60d lead
+				return c
+			}(),
+			expected: domain.PolicySeverityCritical,
+		},
+		{
+			name: "CertificateLifetime Error via 365d span vs 90d max",
+			rule: mkRule("r-cl", domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime, domain.PolicySeverityError, `{"max_days": 90}`),
+			cert: evalCert(),
+			setupFn: func(svc *PolicyService) {
+				// Seed a version with 365d lifetime on the same cert ID used
+				// by evalCert().
+				cr := &mockCertRepo{
+					Certs:    map[string]*domain.ManagedCertificate{},
+					Versions: map[string][]*domain.CertificateVersion{},
+				}
+				now := time.Now()
+				cr.Versions["cert-001"] = []*domain.CertificateVersion{{
+					ID:            "ver-001",
+					CertificateID: "cert-001",
+					NotBefore:     now.AddDate(0, 0, -10),
+					NotAfter:      now.AddDate(1, 0, -10), // ~365d lifetime
+				}}
+				svc.SetCertRepo(cr)
+			},
+			expected: domain.PolicySeverityError,
+		},
+	}
+
+	for _, tc := range cases {
+		t.Run(tc.name, func(t *testing.T) {
+			policyRepo := &mockPolicyRepo{
+				Rules:      map[string]*domain.PolicyRule{tc.rule.ID: tc.rule},
+				Violations: []*domain.PolicyViolation{},
+			}
+			auditService := NewAuditService(&mockAuditRepo{})
+			svc := NewPolicyService(policyRepo, auditService)
+			if tc.setupFn != nil {
+				tc.setupFn(svc)
+			}
+
+			violations, err := svc.ValidateCertificate(ctx, tc.cert)
+			if err != nil {
+				t.Fatalf("ValidateCertificate failed: %v", err)
+			}
+			if len(violations) != 1 {
+				t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation, got %d", len(violations))
+			}
+			if violations[0].Severity != tc.expected {
+				t.Errorf("expected severity %q, got %q", tc.expected, violations[0].Severity)
+			}
+			if violations[0].RuleID != tc.rule.ID {
+				t.Errorf("expected rule ID %q, got %q", tc.rule.ID, violations[0].RuleID)
+			}
+		})
+	}
+}
+
+// TestEvaluateRule_ConfigConsumed pins invariant #2 — non-empty Config drives
+// arm behavior (allowlists, thresholds, keys). Each subtest supplies a config
+// that the cert would satisfy under the backward-compat missing-field path
+// but violates under the config-aware path. A regression to the pre-D-008
+// "config silently dropped" behavior would make these pass with 0 violations.
+func TestEvaluateRule_ConfigConsumed(t *testing.T) {
+	ctx := context.Background()
+
+	t.Run("AllowedIssuers rejects issuer not in allowlist", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-ai", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedIssuers, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"allowed_issuer_ids": ["iss-acme"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.IssuerID = "iss-wrong"
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation for disallowed issuer, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+		if !strings.Contains(violations[0].Message, "iss-wrong") {
+			t.Errorf("expected message to mention issuer ID, got %q", violations[0].Message)
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("AllowedIssuers accepts issuer in allowlist", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-ai", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedIssuers, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"allowed_issuer_ids": ["iss-acme"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.IssuerID = "iss-acme"
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations for allowed issuer, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("AllowedDomains rejects SAN outside allowlist", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-ad", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedDomains, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"allowed_domains": ["*.foo.com"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.SANs = []string{"bar.elsewhere.com"}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation for disallowed SAN, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("AllowedDomains wildcard matches single-label subdomain", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-ad", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedDomains, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"allowed_domains": ["*.foo.com"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.SANs = []string{"bar.foo.com"}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations for single-label wildcard match, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("AllowedDomains wildcard rejects multi-label subdomain", func(t *testing.T) {
+		// X.509 wildcard semantics: *.foo consumes exactly one label.
+		rule := mkRule("r-ad", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedDomains, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"allowed_domains": ["*.foo.com"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.SANs = []string{"baz.bar.foo.com"}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 1 violation for multi-label wildcard (X.509 semantics), got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("RequiredMetadata rejects missing key", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-rm", domain.PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"required_keys": ["owner"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.Tags = map[string]string{"team": "platform"}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation for missing owner key, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+		if !strings.Contains(violations[0].Message, "owner") {
+			t.Errorf("expected message to mention the missing key, got %q", violations[0].Message)
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("RequiredMetadata accepts all required keys present", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-rm", domain.PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"required_keys": ["owner"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.Tags = map[string]string{"owner": "alice"}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations when all required keys present, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("AllowedEnvironments rejects env outside allowlist", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-ae", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedEnvironments, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"allowed": ["production", "staging"]}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.Environment = "wild-west"
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation for disallowed env, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("RenewalLeadTime fires when remaining < configured lead", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-rl", domain.PolicyTypeRenewalLeadTime, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"lead_time_days": 60}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.ExpiresAt = time.Now().AddDate(0, 0, 30) // 30d < 60d lead
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation for 30d remaining vs 60d lead, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("RenewalLeadTime quiet when remaining > configured lead", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-rl", domain.PolicyTypeRenewalLeadTime, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"lead_time_days": 14}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.ExpiresAt = time.Now().AddDate(0, 0, 60) // 60d > 14d lead
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations when plenty of runway remains, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("CertificateLifetime fires when lifetime exceeds max", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-cl", domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"max_days": 90}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		now := time.Now()
+
+		certRepo := &mockCertRepo{
+			Certs:    map[string]*domain.ManagedCertificate{},
+			Versions: map[string][]*domain.CertificateVersion{},
+		}
+		certRepo.Versions["cert-001"] = []*domain.CertificateVersion{{
+			ID:            "ver-001",
+			CertificateID: "cert-001",
+			NotBefore:     now.AddDate(0, 0, -1),
+			NotAfter:      now.AddDate(1, 0, -1), // ~365d > 90d
+		}}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, certRepo)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 violation for 365d lifetime vs 90d max, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+		if !strings.Contains(violations[0].Message, "90 days") {
+			t.Errorf("expected message to mention max_days threshold, got %q", violations[0].Message)
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("CertificateLifetime quiet when lifetime within max", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-cl", domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime, domain.PolicySeverityWarning,
+			`{"max_days": 90}`)
+		cert := evalCert()
+		now := time.Now()
+
+		certRepo := &mockCertRepo{
+			Certs:    map[string]*domain.ManagedCertificate{},
+			Versions: map[string][]*domain.CertificateVersion{},
+		}
+		certRepo.Versions["cert-001"] = []*domain.CertificateVersion{{
+			ID:            "ver-001",
+			CertificateID: "cert-001",
+			NotBefore:     now.AddDate(0, 0, -10),
+			NotAfter:      now.AddDate(0, 0, 60), // 70d lifetime < 90d
+		}}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, certRepo)
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations for 70d lifetime under 90d max, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+}
+
+// TestEvaluateRule_EmptyConfig_BackCompat pins invariant #3 — a rule with no
+// Config (e.g., a legacy row from a pre-D-008 migration) still fires on the
+// pre-D-008 missing-field shape using its configured severity. This is how
+// we let existing deployments migrate without a schema rewrite.
+func TestEvaluateRule_EmptyConfig_BackCompat(t *testing.T) {
+	ctx := context.Background()
+
+	t.Run("RequiredMetadata fires on zero tags", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-rm", domain.PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata, domain.PolicySeverityError, "")
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.Tags = nil
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Fatalf("expected 1 backcompat violation, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+		if violations[0].Severity != domain.PolicySeverityError {
+			t.Errorf("expected severity Error (passed through from rule), got %q", violations[0].Severity)
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("RequiredMetadata quiet when any tags present under empty config", func(t *testing.T) {
+		// Empty config means "only fire on missing-field shape" — so a cert
+		// with any tags (even not what a human would call meaningful) passes.
+		rule := mkRule("r-rm", domain.PolicyTypeRequiredMetadata, domain.PolicySeverityError, "")
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.Tags = map[string]string{"arbitrary": "value"}
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations under backcompat shape w/ tags set, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("RenewalLeadTime uses 30d default under empty/zero config", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-rl", domain.PolicyTypeRenewalLeadTime, domain.PolicySeverityWarning, "")
+		cert := evalCert()
+		cert.ExpiresAt = time.Now().AddDate(0, 0, 15) // 15d < 30d default
+
+		violations := runEval(ctx, t, rule, cert, nil)
+		if len(violations) != 1 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 1 violation under 30d backcompat default, got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+}
+
+// TestEvaluateRule_BadConfig_SkipsRule pins invariant #4 — malformed JSON in
+// Config returns an error from evaluateRule, which ValidateCertificate logs
+// and swallows. The pass continues; no zero-value violation is emitted.
+// Co-located rules still fire normally.
+func TestEvaluateRule_BadConfig_SkipsRule(t *testing.T) {
+	ctx := context.Background()
+
+	// Rule 1 has malformed JSON — should log+skip.
+	// Rule 2 is a healthy AllowedIssuers rule that should still emit its
+	// violation on the missing-IssuerID cert. If the bad rule poisoned the
+	// loop, we'd see 0 or 2 violations instead of exactly 1.
+	badRule := mkRule("r-bad", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedIssuers, domain.PolicySeverityError,
+		`{"allowed_issuer_ids": [`) // unterminated JSON
+	goodRule := mkRule("r-good", domain.PolicyTypeAllowedEnvironments, domain.PolicySeverityWarning, "")
+
+	policyRepo := &mockPolicyRepo{
+		Rules: map[string]*domain.PolicyRule{
+			badRule.ID:  badRule,
+			goodRule.ID: goodRule,
+		},
+		Violations: []*domain.PolicyViolation{},
+	}
+	auditService := NewAuditService(&mockAuditRepo{})
+	svc := NewPolicyService(policyRepo, auditService)
+
+	cert := evalCert()
+	cert.IssuerID = ""    // would trigger the bad rule if it wasn't skipped
+	cert.Environment = "" // triggers goodRule via missing-field backcompat
+
+	violations, err := svc.ValidateCertificate(ctx, cert)
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatalf("ValidateCertificate should swallow rule-eval errors, got %v", err)
+	}
+	if len(violations) != 1 {
+		t.Fatalf("expected exactly 1 violation (bad rule skipped, good rule fires), got %d", len(violations))
+	}
+	if violations[0].RuleID != goodRule.ID {
+		t.Errorf("expected violation from r-good, got %q", violations[0].RuleID)
+	}
+}
+
+// TestEvaluateRule_CertificateLifetime_RepoScenarios pins the setter-injection
+// pattern for the 6th arm. SetCertRepo wires the dependency; without it the
+// arm errors (logged+skipped by the caller). With it but no version present,
+// the arm silently returns nil (matching the missing-field backcompat shape).
+func TestEvaluateRule_CertificateLifetime_RepoScenarios(t *testing.T) {
+	ctx := context.Background()
+
+	t.Run("repo not wired logs and skips", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-cl", domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime, domain.PolicySeverityError,
+			`{"max_days": 90}`)
+		policyRepo := &mockPolicyRepo{
+			Rules:      map[string]*domain.PolicyRule{rule.ID: rule},
+			Violations: []*domain.PolicyViolation{},
+		}
+		svc := NewPolicyService(policyRepo, NewAuditService(&mockAuditRepo{}))
+		// deliberately do NOT call SetCertRepo
+
+		violations, err := svc.ValidateCertificate(ctx, evalCert())
+		if err != nil {
+			t.Fatalf("ValidateCertificate should swallow the nil-repo error, got %v", err)
+		}
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations when repo unwired (rule skipped), got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("version missing silently skips", func(t *testing.T) {
+		rule := mkRule("r-cl", domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime, domain.PolicySeverityError,
+			`{"max_days": 90}`)
+		policyRepo := &mockPolicyRepo{
+			Rules:      map[string]*domain.PolicyRule{rule.ID: rule},
+			Violations: []*domain.PolicyViolation{},
+		}
+		svc := NewPolicyService(policyRepo, NewAuditService(&mockAuditRepo{}))
+		// Empty Versions map — GetLatestVersion returns errNotFound, arm skips.
+		svc.SetCertRepo(&mockCertRepo{
+			Certs:    map[string]*domain.ManagedCertificate{},
+			Versions: map[string][]*domain.CertificateVersion{},
+		})
+
+		violations, err := svc.ValidateCertificate(ctx, evalCert())
+		if err != nil {
+			t.Fatalf("ValidateCertificate failed: %v", err)
+		}
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations when no version exists (nothing to measure), got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+
+	t.Run("max_days zero/absent means no enforcement", func(t *testing.T) {
+		// Even with a version, max_days=0 is a no-op (matches the
+		// no-threshold-configured guard in the arm).
+		rule := mkRule("r-cl", domain.PolicyTypeCertificateLifetime, domain.PolicySeverityError, "")
+		policyRepo := &mockPolicyRepo{
+			Rules:      map[string]*domain.PolicyRule{rule.ID: rule},
+			Violations: []*domain.PolicyViolation{},
+		}
+		svc := NewPolicyService(policyRepo, NewAuditService(&mockAuditRepo{}))
+		now := time.Now()
+		svc.SetCertRepo(&mockCertRepo{
+			Certs: map[string]*domain.ManagedCertificate{},
+			Versions: map[string][]*domain.CertificateVersion{
+				"cert-001": {{
+					CertificateID: "cert-001",
+					NotBefore:     now.AddDate(0, 0, -1),
+					NotAfter:      now.AddDate(10, 0, 0), // 10 years — huge but unchecked
+				}},
+			},
+		})
+
+		violations, err := svc.ValidateCertificate(ctx, evalCert())
+		if err != nil {
+			t.Fatalf("ValidateCertificate failed: %v", err)
+		}
+		if len(violations) != 0 {
+			t.Errorf("expected 0 violations when max_days absent (no enforcement), got %d", len(violations))
+		}
+	})
+}
+
+// runEval is a test helper that exercises ValidateCertificate against a
+// single-rule configuration and returns the violation slice. Optionally
+// wires a cert repo for the CertificateLifetime arm.
+func runEval(ctx context.Context, t *testing.T, rule *domain.PolicyRule, cert *domain.ManagedCertificate, certRepo *mockCertRepo) []*domain.PolicyViolation {
+	t.Helper()
+	policyRepo := &mockPolicyRepo{
+		Rules:      map[string]*domain.PolicyRule{rule.ID: rule},
+		Violations: []*domain.PolicyViolation{},
+	}
+	svc := NewPolicyService(policyRepo, NewAuditService(&mockAuditRepo{}))
+	if certRepo != nil {
+		svc.SetCertRepo(certRepo)
+	}
+	violations, err := svc.ValidateCertificate(ctx, cert)
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatalf("ValidateCertificate failed: %v", err)
+	}
+	return violations
+}

migrations/000014_policy_violation_severity_check.down.sql

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+-- Rollback migration 000014: drop the policy_violations severity CHECK.
+--
+-- Drops the named CHECK constraint added by the up migration. The severity
+-- column itself stays (it predates this migration — see 000001 line 183),
+-- so any application code that reads/writes the column continues to work.
+-- Only the DB-level enforcement of the TitleCase allowlist is removed.
+
+ALTER TABLE policy_violations
+    DROP CONSTRAINT IF EXISTS policy_violations_severity_check;

migrations/000014_policy_violation_severity_check.up.sql

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+-- Migration 000014: CHECK constraint on policy_violations.severity
+--
+-- Sibling to migration 000013, which added severity + CHECK to policy_rules.
+-- policy_violations has carried a severity column since the initial schema
+-- (000001, line 183) but without any CHECK. The engine used to hardcode
+-- `Warning` on every violation regardless of the triggering rule's severity
+-- (see pre-D-008 internal/service/policy.go:evaluateRule), so the column
+-- value was uniform by accident of implementation, not by constraint.
+--
+-- D-008 rewrites evaluateRule to copy rule.Severity into the violation. The
+-- engine now writes values drawn from the application-layer PolicySeverity
+-- allowlist, but nothing at the DB level prevents a future caller — or a
+-- bypassed write from a migration or psql session — from inserting casing
+-- drift ('warning', 'ERROR', etc.) and re-opening the same class of bug
+-- that D-005 and D-006 closed. This constraint is the defense-in-depth
+-- complement to the handler validator.
+--
+-- Pre-existing seed_demo.sql rows use lowercase severity values. D-008
+-- updates those in the same commit so this migration can apply cleanly
+-- against both a fresh install and an upgraded install that has already
+-- seeded the demo data.
+--
+-- Named constraint (policy_violations_severity_check) so the down migration
+-- can DROP it by name without ambiguity; un-named CHECK constraints use
+-- a synthesized PostgreSQL name that varies by environment.
+
+ALTER TABLE policy_violations
+    ADD CONSTRAINT policy_violations_severity_check
+    CHECK (severity IN ('Warning', 'Error', 'Critical'));

migrations/seed.sql

@@ -12,19 +12,25 @@ VALUES (
   '[30, 14, 7, 0]'::jsonb
 ) ON CONFLICT (id) DO NOTHING;
 
--- Policy rules: Require owner assignment
--- Severity differentiated per rule to demonstrate the field means something
--- (D-006). The backend CHECK constraint (migration 000013) enforces the
--- TitleCase allowlist Warning/Error/Critical. Type-value drift
--- (ownership/environment/lifetime/renewal_window vs. the engine's TitleCase
--- canonicals) is tracked separately in d/D-008 and intentionally left
--- unchanged in this commit.
+-- Policy rules: Require owner assignment, bound environments, cap lifetime,
+-- and enforce a renewal lead-time.
+--
+-- Severity is differentiated per rule (D-006) and the types are now the
+-- TitleCase canonicals the engine actually recognizes (D-008). Pre-D-008 the
+-- types were lowercase strings (`ownership`, `environment`, `lifetime`,
+-- `renewal_window`) that the engine silently dropped through to its
+-- default-case error path — the rules looked alive in the GUI but did not
+-- enforce anything. The backend CHECK constraint (migration 000013) enforces
+-- the TitleCase severity allowlist Warning/Error/Critical. Configs are also
+-- reshaped to match the D-008 per-arm schemas so the rules actually exercise
+-- the config-consuming paths instead of falling back to the missing-field
+-- placeholders.
 INSERT INTO policy_rules (id, name, type, config, enabled, severity)
 VALUES (
   'pr-require-owner',
   'require-owner',
-  'ownership',
-  '{"requirement": "owner_id must be set"}'::jsonb,
+  'RequiredMetadata',
+  '{"required_keys": ["owner"]}'::jsonb,
   true,
   'Warning'
 ) ON CONFLICT (id) DO NOTHING;
@@ -34,7 +40,7 @@ INSERT INTO policy_rules (id, name, type, config, enabled, severity)
 VALUES (
   'pr-allowed-environments',
   'allowed-environments',
-  'environment',
+  'AllowedEnvironments',
   '{"allowed": ["production", "staging", "development"]}'::jsonb,
   true,
   'Error'
@@ -45,19 +51,19 @@ INSERT INTO policy_rules (id, name, type, config, enabled, severity)
 VALUES (
   'pr-max-certificate-lifetime',
   'max-certificate-lifetime',
-  'lifetime',
+  'CertificateLifetime',
   '{"max_days": 90}'::jsonb,
   true,
   'Critical'
 ) ON CONFLICT (id) DO NOTHING;
 
--- Policy rules: Minimum renewal window
+-- Policy rules: Minimum renewal window (renew at least 14 days before expiry)
 INSERT INTO policy_rules (id, name, type, config, enabled, severity)
 VALUES (
   'pr-min-renewal-window',
   'min-renewal-window',
-  'renewal_window',
-  '{"min_days": 14}'::jsonb,
+  'RenewalLeadTime',
+  '{"lead_time_days": 14}'::jsonb,
   true,
   'Warning'
 ) ON CONFLICT (id) DO NOTHING;

migrations/seed_demo.sql

@@ -478,13 +478,20 @@ ON CONFLICT (id) DO NOTHING;
 -- ============================================================
 -- 13. Policy Violations
 -- ============================================================
+-- D-008: severity values rewritten to TitleCase canonicals (Warning/Error/Critical).
+-- Pre-D-008 these rows used lowercase strings ('critical', 'error', 'warning'). Those
+-- values were silently tolerated by the pre-D-008 engine, which hardcoded 'Warning'
+-- on every new violation regardless of the triggering rule's severity. D-008 rewires
+-- evaluateRule to copy rule.Severity into the violation AND migration 000014 adds a
+-- CHECK constraint enforcing the TitleCase allowlist at the DB level. Both paths now
+-- round-trip correctly against these demo rows.
 INSERT INTO policy_violations (id, certificate_id, rule_id, message, severity, created_at) VALUES
-  ('pv-001', 'mc-legacy-prod', 'pr-max-certificate-lifetime', 'Certificate has expired and exceeds maximum lifetime policy', 'critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '3 days'),
-  ('pv-002', 'mc-old-api',     'pr-max-certificate-lifetime', 'Certificate expired 15 days ago',                            'critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '15 days'),
-  ('pv-003', 'mc-vpn-prod',    'pr-min-renewal-window',       'Renewal failed within minimum renewal window',               'error',    NOW() - INTERVAL '3 days'),
-  ('pv-004', 'mc-mail-prod',   'pr-min-renewal-window',       'Certificate expiring in 5 days, below 14-day minimum window','warning',  NOW() - INTERVAL '20 minutes'),
-  ('pv-005', 'mc-wiki-prod',   'pr-max-certificate-lifetime', 'Certificate expired 7 days ago',                             'critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '7 days'),
-  ('pv-006', 'mc-compromised', 'pr-min-renewal-window',       'Certificate revoked due to key compromise',                  'critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '14 days')
+  ('pv-001', 'mc-legacy-prod', 'pr-max-certificate-lifetime', 'Certificate has expired and exceeds maximum lifetime policy', 'Critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '3 days'),
+  ('pv-002', 'mc-old-api',     'pr-max-certificate-lifetime', 'Certificate expired 15 days ago',                            'Critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '15 days'),
+  ('pv-003', 'mc-vpn-prod',    'pr-min-renewal-window',       'Renewal failed within minimum renewal window',               'Error',    NOW() - INTERVAL '3 days'),
+  ('pv-004', 'mc-mail-prod',   'pr-min-renewal-window',       'Certificate expiring in 5 days, below 14-day minimum window','Warning',  NOW() - INTERVAL '20 minutes'),
+  ('pv-005', 'mc-wiki-prod',   'pr-max-certificate-lifetime', 'Certificate expired 7 days ago',                             'Critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '7 days'),
+  ('pv-006', 'mc-compromised', 'pr-min-renewal-window',       'Certificate revoked due to key compromise',                  'Critical', NOW() - INTERVAL '14 days')
 ON CONFLICT (id) DO NOTHING;
 
 -- ============================================================

web/src/api/types.test.ts

@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ describe('POLICY_TYPES', () => {
       'RequiredMetadata',
       'AllowedEnvironments',
       'RenewalLeadTime',
+      'CertificateLifetime',
     ]);
   });
 

web/src/api/types.ts

@@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ export const POLICY_TYPES = [
   'RequiredMetadata',
   'AllowedEnvironments',
   'RenewalLeadTime',
+  'CertificateLifetime',
 ] as const;
 export type PolicyType = (typeof POLICY_TYPES)[number];