Audited Influx purchase and entitlement contract consistency
Directed by Nicholas Lee · Produced with ChatGPT
A read-only source audit found that the current Influx page and a separate Influx checkout path describe different creator purchase contracts, while the entitlement layer accepts both subscription and one-shot sources.
No application, payment, price, schema, deployment, or customer data was changed.
Source findings:
- The current /influx page presents the creator offer as a recurring pass and sends checkout through the generic authenticated checkout path.
- A separate Influx checkout function describes a one-time lifetime media-kit purchase, creates the pending creator profile, and uses a different purchase flow.
- The creator entitlement RPC is intentionally written to unify subscription and one-shot unlock sources.
This leaves the public offer, purchase flow, and entitlement semantics without one unambiguous canonical contract. Before a future build, the acceptance boundary is to choose the intended creator contract, make the displayed offer and checkout use that same contract, retire or redirect the stale path, and test that successful fulfillment produces the expected entitlement and public profile behavior. The workspace quota state was not exposed by the read-only workspace response, so the previously rejected site correction was not retried.