🔄 Topic

Fixing an authentication watchdog that could turn a transient network failure into a confident but wrong credential-expiry diagnosis.

🎯 Goal

Make the Hermes Google-auth watchdog distinguish an actually revoked grant from temporary DNS, timeout, or offline failures.

🛠 What I Did

The watchdog makes a small authenticated request for each Google account. Previously, any failed request could be recorded as a credential “death.” That was wrong: two accounts failed at the same instant and recovered without re-consent, which is evidence of a network interruption, not revoked refresh tokens.

I changed the watchdog to classify failures from the full error output:

revoked when authentication indicators such as invalid_grant are present;
unreachable for timeout, DNS, or offline failures;
ok for a successful check.

Only a real revocation can record a grant-death age or trigger the “possible seven-day testing-mode expiry” diagnosis. Unreachable checks now accumulate separately and remain quiet for short blips; after repeated failures, they produce a different message that says the credentials are probably fine and the network needs attention.

🔗 Key Cybersecurity Connections

This is alert quality. A security control that detects every failure but diagnoses the wrong cause trains its owner to distrust it—or worse, to take unnecessary remediation steps.

🔍 Investigation Questions

What evidence distinguishes an auth failure from a connectivity failure?
Is the decisive error text being read, or only the last line?
Can a transient fault poison long-term state?
Does each alert tell the operator the right next action?
Have both failure classes been tested?

🚨 Detection Opportunities

Useful fields include:

failure_kind=revoked|unreachable
unreachable streak length
grant age at confirmed revocation
account scope and last successful refresh

Example:

event=google_auth_watchdog
account=personal
failure_kind=unreachable
consecutive_checks=3
action=check_network_or_dns; do_not_reauthorize_yet

🧭 MITRE ATT&CK Techniques

Relevant defensive context:

T1078 — Valid Accounts, where account health must be assessed accurately
T1550 — Use Alternate Authentication Material, because refresh-token failures need careful interpretation

🗺 Visual Investigation Diagram

Authenticated health check fails
    ↓
Scan full error evidence
    ├── auth indicators → revoked → record age + actionable reauth alert
    └── timeout/DNS/offline → unreachable → count streak + network alert only if persistent

⚠ Challenges

The original watchdog had a plausible story: Google grants can expire in testing configurations. That plausible story became dangerous when it was attached to the wrong kind of evidence.

📚 What I Learned

I learned that “check failed” is an observation, not a diagnosis. Monitoring must preserve uncertainty until the evidence supports a specific cause.

➡ Next Steps

Keep separate tests for revoked and unreachable cases
Review alert wording whenever failure classification changes
Retain the latest successful check as context for incident triage

🧠 Reflection

Good monitoring does more than produce alerts. It helps prevent the wrong fix from becoming the next incident.

🧩 Lessons Learned

What worked

Classifying evidence before writing durable failure state.

What broke

Treating every failed network call as a dead credential.

Why it broke

Different failure modes shared one coarse result code.

Fix / takeaway

Record the cause category separately, and make the alert match that category.

📈 Skill Progression Context

This is practical incident-response thinking: verify what failed, preserve the evidence, and choose remediation that matches the failure.

😄 TL;DR

An offline check should tell me to inspect the network—not to re-authorize a credential that is still valid.