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. This is about client-side exposure from what ships in the app -- a separate, local-only, gitignored skill (name: legal-check, not present in every checkout) instead reviews public-doc prose for Russian VPN/circumvention advertising-law framing risk. If the task is about wording in a README or public doc rather than which hosts/targets ship, that is the other skill's job.

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.