## Thinking Path > - Paperclip orchestrates AI agents for zero-human companies. > - Fresh self-hosted deployments need an operator path before any invite exists. > - Umbrel installs are private LAN deployments, so a one-time browser claim is appropriate only when the deployment is private and unclaimed. > - Public deployments and installs with active invites must keep the existing invite-only model so admin creation is not exposed broadly. > - GitHub PR #2927 established the useful direction, but it needed to be adapted onto current `master` rather than merged as-is. > - This pull request adds that adapted private-only claim flow across server, UI, docs, and regression coverage. > - The benefit is that a fresh private Umbrel-style install can be claimed from the browser without weakening public deployment access. ## What Changed - Added a first-admin claim service and access route support for one-time admin claim eligibility on private unclaimed deployments. - Updated the bootstrap/access UI so eligible private installs show a setup claim path, while public and invited deployments keep invite-first behavior. - Added a bootstrap-pending setup UX lab covering claim, invite, public, and signed-in access states. - Updated deployment and local development docs for authenticated private/public behavior and the Umbrel-style claim path. - Added server and UI regression tests for private claim, public no-claim, active invite fallback, existing board/no-access flows, and health exposure reporting. - Stabilized PR handoff verification by serializing the aggregate server Vitest workspace run, forcing `NODE_ENV=test`, and relaxing the heartbeat batching test around legitimate recovery follow-up runs. ## Verification - `pnpm -r typecheck` - `pnpm build` - `pnpm vitest --run server/src/__tests__/heartbeat-comment-wake-batching.test.ts` - `pnpm vitest --run server/src/__tests__/health-dev-server-token.test.ts` - `pnpm test:run` - QA validation: PAP-10115 passed browser validation with screenshots for private fresh install claim, active invite versus claim conflict, public invite-only/claim-absent behavior, existing invite fallback, and normal board/no-access flows. - GitHub closeout: issue #2579 and PR #2927 were updated with the accepted direction: adapt the implementation, do not direct-merge #2927 as-is. ## Risks - The claim endpoint must remain private-only and one-time; a regression here could expose admin creation on public deployments. - Existing invite behavior must remain intact for public deployments and installs that already have an active invite. - The stable Vitest harness now serializes the aggregate server workspace group; this is slower, but it avoids DB-backed suite collisions under root workspace mode. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected - check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. > > ROADMAP.md checked: this is a scoped deployment bootstrap/access fix and does not duplicate a listed roadmap project. ## Model Used - OpenAI GPT-5 Codex via Paperclip `codex_local` for product engineering, implementation, and verification, with tool-enabled local code execution. Paperclip QA browser validation was performed in PAP-10115 by the assigned QA agent; exact adapter model metadata for that QA run is not exposed in this PR context. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] If this change affects the UI, I have included before/after screenshots - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
6.0 KiB
Deployment Modes
Status: Canonical deployment and auth mode model
Date: 2026-02-23
1. Purpose
Paperclip supports two runtime modes:
local_trustedauthenticated
authenticated supports two exposure policies:
privatepublic
This keeps one authenticated auth stack while still separating low-friction private-network defaults from internet-facing hardening requirements.
Paperclip now treats bind as a separate concern from auth:
- auth model:
local_trustedvsauthenticated, plusprivate/public - reachability model:
server.bind = loopback | lan | tailnet | custom
2. Canonical Model
| Runtime Mode | Exposure | Human auth | Primary use |
|---|---|---|---|
local_trusted |
n/a | No login required | Single-operator local machine workflow |
authenticated |
private |
Login required | Private-network access (for example Tailscale/VPN/LAN) |
authenticated |
public |
Login required | Internet-facing/cloud deployment |
Reachability Model
| Bind | Meaning | Typical use |
|---|---|---|
loopback |
Listen on localhost only | default local usage, reverse-proxy deployments |
lan |
Listen on all interfaces (0.0.0.0) |
LAN/VPN/private-network access |
tailnet |
Listen on a detected Tailscale IP | Tailscale-only access |
custom |
Listen on an explicit host/IP | advanced interface-specific setups |
3. Security Policy
local_trusted
- loopback-only host binding
- no human login flow
- optimized for fastest local startup
authenticated + private
- login required
- low-friction URL handling (
autobase URL mode) - private-host trust policy required
- bind can be
loopback,lan,tailnet, orcustom
authenticated + public
- login required
- explicit public URL required
- stricter deployment checks and failures in doctor
- recommended bind is
loopbackbehind a reverse proxy; directlan/customis advanced
4. Onboarding UX Contract
Default onboarding remains interactive and flagless:
pnpm paperclipai onboard
Server prompt behavior:
- quickstart
--yesdefaults toserver.bind=loopbackand thereforelocal_trusted/private - advanced server setup asks reachability first:
Trusted local→bind=loopback,local_trusted/privatePrivate network→bind=lan,authenticated/privateTailnet→bind=tailnet,authenticated/privateCustom→ manual mode/exposure/host entry
- raw host entry is only required for the
Custompath - explicit public URL is only required for
authenticated + public
Examples:
pnpm paperclipai onboard --yes
pnpm paperclipai onboard --yes --bind lan
pnpm paperclipai run --bind tailnet
configure --section server follows the same interactive behavior.
5. Doctor UX Contract
Default doctor remains flagless:
pnpm paperclipai doctor
Doctor reads configured mode/exposure and applies mode-aware checks. Optional override flags are secondary.
6. Board/User Integration Contract
Board identity must be represented by a real DB user principal for user-based features to work consistently.
Required integration points:
- real user row in
authUsersfor Board identity instance_user_rolesentry for Board admin authoritycompany_membershipsintegration for user-level task assignment and access
This is required because user assignment paths validate active membership for assigneeUserId.
7. Local Trusted -> Authenticated Claim Flow
When running authenticated mode, if the only instance admin is local-board, Paperclip emits a startup warning with a one-time high-entropy claim URL.
- URL format:
/board-claim/<token>?code=<code> - intended use: signed-in human claims board ownership
- claim action:
- promotes current signed-in user to
instance_admin - demotes
local-boardadmin role - ensures active owner membership for the claiming user across existing companies
- promotes current signed-in user to
This prevents lockout when a user migrates from long-running local trusted usage to authenticated mode.
8. First Admin Setup For Fresh Authenticated Installs
Fresh authenticated installs start in bootstrap_pending until the first
instance_admin exists.
For authenticated/private, Paperclip supports a browser-first setup path:
- open the Paperclip URL from the private network or appliance UI
- sign in or create a Paperclip account
- choose
Claim this instanceon the setup screen
That browser claim promotes the signed-in session user to the first instance
admin and then falls through to normal onboarding. The endpoint is available
only to real browser session actors in authenticated/private; unauthenticated
requests, agent keys, board API keys, and local implicit board actors are
rejected.
The CLI fallback remains supported in all authenticated setup states:
pnpm paperclipai auth bootstrap-ceo
That command prints a one-time first-admin invite URL. Browser claim and bootstrap invite acceptance share the same first-admin transaction, so whichever path wins first makes later attempts return a conflict.
For authenticated/public, browser first-admin claim is intentionally disabled.
Public deployments must use the high-entropy bootstrap invite path unless a
future public-hosted setup design explicitly changes this policy.
9. Current Code Reality (As Of 2026-02-23)
- runtime values are
local_trusted | authenticated authenticateduses Better Auth sessions and bootstrap invite flowlocal_trustedensures a real local Board user principal inauthUserswithinstance_user_rolesadmin access- company creation ensures creator membership in
company_membershipsso user assignment/access flows remain consistent
10. Naming and Compatibility Policy
- canonical naming is
local_trustedandauthenticatedwithprivate/publicexposure - no long-term compatibility alias layer for discarded naming variants
11. Relationship to Other Docs
- implementation plan:
doc/plans/deployment-auth-mode-consolidation.md - V1 contract:
doc/SPEC-implementation.md - operator workflows:
doc/DEVELOPING.mdanddoc/CLI.md - invite/join state map:
doc/spec/invite-flow.md