HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

docybo

no profile record

Submissions

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·3 bulan yang lalu·0 comments

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·4 bulan yang lalu·0 comments

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·4 bulan yang lalu·0 comments

[untitled]

1 points·by docybo·4 bulan yang lalu·0 comments

comments

docybo
·3 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·3 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·3 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[dead]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
[flagged]
docybo
·4 bulan yang lalu·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
·4 bulan yang lalu·discuss
that's quiet good. will give a try congrat !