Trust level 3 requirements: a clarification

Trust level 3 requirements: a clarification — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable.

Trust level 3 requirements, and specifically the version of it that the documentation does not cover. The maintained page handles the general case well and stops exactly where my question starts.

Setting out the gap in case it is a gap in the page rather than a gap in what is known.

This follows the opening post rather than contradicting it.

Thank you for announcing it in advance rather than after. The number of places that do the reverse is remarkable.

Somebody will have a better source than mine, and I hope they post it.

Nothing to add, except that this is the answer I would give if asked.

For anyone finding this later: the short answer on trust level 3 requirements is that it depends on one thing, and the rest of the thread is people identifying which thing.

Coming back to post #4, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.

Clarification on the announcement, because two people have now read it the same wrong way. That is a writing failure rather than a reading one, and the original has been edited with a note.

It is worth checking rather than assuming, which costs nothing.

Picking up post #4: that is the part I would want checked first.

Practical note on trust level 3 requirements: write down what you expect before you look. The number of times I have found what I went looking for is higher than chance would allow.

I disagree with the framing of trust level 3 requirements above, and I think it is a substantive disagreement rather than a terminological one. Setting out why, so it can be checked.

The reasoning depends on an assumption that is doing a lot of work and is never stated. If the assumption holds, the conclusion follows. I do not think it holds generally.

Bookmarking this. I will come back when I have something worth adding.

Thank you — that answers what I came here to find out.

The rare case here is the one that costs somebody a week, though, and the common case costs everyone ten seconds. I think the trade is clearly correct.

The edit is clearer. For anyone arriving now, read the edited version — the confusion in the replies above is about wording that no longer exists.

Trust level 3 requirements is well covered in the tag pages, and the older discussions are better than the recent ones because they were argued out properly. Worth twenty minutes before adding to this one.

Reading rather than contributing, but this is the most useful thread I have found on it.

Worth separating two things that post #10 runs together.

What I would want before treating trust level 3 requirements as settled: the method, the sample, and whether anyone tried to find the opposite result. Two of the three are usually missing.