HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

docybo

no profile record

Submissions

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·vor 3 Monaten·0 comments

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·vor 4 Monaten·0 comments

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·vor 4 Monaten·0 comments

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·vor 4 Monaten·0 comments

comments

docybo
·vor 3 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 3 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 3 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
[flagged]
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
Feels like most agent security discussions focus on where the agent runs (VMs, sandboxes, etc), but not whether the action itself should execute.

Even in a locked-down VM the agent can still send emails, spin up infra, hit APIs, burn tokens.

A pattern we've been experimenting with is putting an authorization boundary between the runtime and the tools it calls. The runtime proposes an action, a policy evaluates it, and the action only runs if authorization verifies.

Curious if others building agent runtimes are exploring similar patterns.
docybo
·vor 4 Monaten·discuss
that's quiet good. will give a try congrat !