🚨 DUSK PRIVACY IS A WEAPON: WHO OWNS THE DECISION? 🚨
The $DUSK architecture guarantees state correctness but shields the actor. You can verify the path, but you cannot name the source. This is intentional design, not an oversight.
• Accountability survives only as "who could have," never "who did."
• Naming the owner retroactively breaks the core privacy promise.
• Workarounds fill the owner field with generic buckets to pass review.
When the pattern repeats, the question returns. They pass the file, but the name remains hidden. $DUSK holds the line.
