Define and enforce a trust/auth model for all RPCs

Severity: critical (product decision).

### Summary

None of the four RPCs (`SendNote`, `FetchNotes`, `StreamNotes`, `Stats`) have any authentication or authorization. The server is built with only CORS, grpc-web, a global concurrency limit, and a request timeout (`crates/node/src/node/grpc/mod.rs:117-126`); there is no interceptor, API key, or mTLS anywhere. gRPC reflection additionally advertises the full API surface (`mod.rs:103-109`).

This is not necessarily a bug — an open, privacy-by-tag relay may be the intended design — but it is currently implicit. It needs to be an explicit, documented decision, because every abuse-resistance control in the meta-issue depends on the answer.

### Options

- **Open relay by design:** then rate limiting (#117), storage quotas (#118), and note validation (#116) become mandatory compensating controls, and this should be stated in the operator docs and proto.
- **Gated:** add an auth interceptor (API key / mTLS) at least for `SendNote` and `Stats`.

### Acceptance

- The trust model is documented (README + operator docs + proto comments).
- If open-by-design, the compensating-control issues are linked as blockers to GA.

Related: #44, #47.

---
Part of #114.

Iniziate leggendo la configurazione del server gRPC in crates/node/src/node/grpc/mod.rs, righe 103-126. Esaminate i quattro metodi RPC (SendNote, FetchNotes, StreamNotes, Stats) e gli intercettori esistenti. La decisione sul modello di fiducia (relay aperto vs. controllato) deve essere presa per prima. Se si implementa l'autenticazione, considerate l'aggiunta di un intercettore per chiavi API o mTLS, concentrandosi su SendNote e Stats. Documentate il modello nel README, nella documentazione per gli operatori e nei commenti del proto.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.