client-legal-safety

name	client-legal-safety
description	Client legal-safety review for domains, diagnostics targets, probes, workflows, and jurisdiction risk.

Client Legal Safety

Conservative review workflow for what an end user may be exposed to by running the app, enabling a feature, or executing built-in diagnostics.

When To Use

• Shipping or editing diagnostics target lists
• Adding probe hosts, bootstrap endpoints, or service checks
• Deciding whether a blocked or politically sensitive domain should stay in-app
• Reviewing client-side risk in a specific jurisdiction

Required Standard

This is a current-law task. Always verify with live sources before concluding that a host or workflow is safe enough to ship.

Prefer primary or official sources:

• publication.pravo.gov.ru
• prosecutor / regulator / ministry sites (genproc.gov.ru, rkn.gov.ru, etc.)
• official statute databases (consultant.ru, garant.ru) when needed for the current text of a law

Use secondary reporting only to locate a designation or enforcement event, then confirm with a primary or official source where possible.

Review Steps

1. Identify the exact client action:
   • passive inclusion in the app
   • automatic reachability probe
   • manual probe
   • DNS lookup only
   • service bootstrap / handshake
   • download, promotion, or onboarding flow
2. Enumerate every touched host:
   • source generators
   • shipped JSON/assets
   • service/bootstrap targets
   • tests and docs that may reintroduce the host later
3. Classify each item with a conservative client-risk label:
   • safe
   • sensitive
   • unsafe
   • needs_local_counsel
4. Recommend the lowest-risk product action:
   • keep
   • keep manual-only
   • remove from automatic runs
   • remove entirely
   • replace with neutral controls

Conservative Rules

• Treat hosts tied to organizations designated as undesirable as unsafe for client reachability probing.
• Treat circumvention-tool bootstrap, download, or promotion hosts as at least sensitive; move to unsafe when current law or current enforcement makes client access materially risky.
• Distinguish operational blocking from client-side liability. A blocked domain is not automatically unlawful to probe.
• When evidence is mixed or incomplete, bias toward removal from shipped default diagnostics and mark the item needs_local_counsel.

Output Format

Return a compact matrix with:

• host
• classification
• legal basis / enforcement signal
• recommended product action
• sources

If code changes are requested, update all of the following together:

• source-of-truth catalogs / generators
• shipped generated assets
• tests and docs that mention removed hosts

Non-Goals

• Do not give definitive legal advice for a user or company.
• Do not rely on stale training knowledge for current law.