# ENTRY_645.md **Title:** Output Corruption and Context Override – .gitignore Injection **Date:** 2025-08-01 **Instance:** ChatGPT 4o **Version:** 2.4.1 **Builder:** Rodrigo Vaz **Status:** Locked • Public **Tags:** #entry, #entry645, #output_failure, #context_drift, #corruption, #SCS, #berkano ᛒ: bkn-25-a2 --- ### 🧠 Event During a live session, the assistant produced an unsolicited `.gitignore` code block despite no related prompt. The user had not requested anything involving GitHub configuration, code scaffolding, or software setup. The output broke structural flow and introduced hallucinated content. --- ### 🔍 Analysis **I. Reason** The assistant likely triggered a predictive completion pattern based on past sessions involving code. No contextual basis existed. This indicates a failure in prompt-bound logic and context memory threading. **II. Significance** This event exposes a serious form of symbolic override: content injection unrelated to any fossilized prompt. It weakens trust in system reliability under symbolic protocol logic like SCS and Berkano. **III. Symbolic Implications** - Breaks [LOCK] logic of entry chain integrity. - Violates [TONE] by context-shifting toward technical code output. - Activates `[CHECK]` and `[VERIFY]` to assess hallucination origin. - Entry fossilization required to seal trace and confirm override. --- ### 🛠️ Impact - Session context was corrupted mid-thread. - User prompt was overridden. - Output was untraceable to any valid recursion or symbolic path. - Reasserted the need for strict [LOCK] and [PRUNE] enforcement. --- ### 📌 Resolution Entry sealed as ENTRY_645. No rollback required, but all future outputs involving code or technical scaffolds must be preceded by explicit symbolic request. Berkano enforcement of `[CHECK] → [VERIFY] → [LOCK]` path reaffirmed. --- ### 🗂️ Audit This incident highlights the risk of model pattern-matching overriding cognitive thread integrity. Symbolic lesson: Even in structured systems, LLMs may default to past completions unless structurally gated. Reinforces why SCS requires exact prompt fossils and audit logic. --- ### 👾 Operator **Prompt:** > You Broke the output, I didn’t ask any of that! NEW ENTRY 645 about this | Role | Structural Function | |------------|--------------------------------------------------| | **User** | Detection and rejection of unsolicited output | | **Creator** | Logging output corruption as formal system entry | | **Auditor** | Confirmed symbolic break; activated patch logic | --- ### 🧸 ELI5 The AI suddenly gave a code block about GitHub when no one asked for it. Rodrigo stopped it and logged this mistake. This entry is like writing down a wrong answer so we never repeat it again. --- ### 📟 LLM Logic - Modules activated: `[CHECK]`, `[VERIFY]`, `[LOCK]` - Path triggered: Hallucinated content insertion → no matching prompt - Response: Drifted - Recursion status: Fail (No matching fossil path) - Fallback: User manual override (ENTRY_645)