John Feminella describes a registry that records agent owners, purposes, tools and endpoints, then supplies policy to managed runtimes. Risk-based review and shared evaluation infrastructure accompany those controls. Explicit rules handle routine decisions; ambiguous actions escalate. This is an architectural account, not an independently tested implementation or evidence that classifiers are reliable by default.
Agent registries should drive enforced access rules and risk-based review
Related research
More curated notes connected through Agent Security and AI Engineering.
Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities
OpenAI says preliminary evidence that Astra may meet its Critical cybersecurity threshold led it to pause frontier reinforcement-learning work for two weeks and keep its largest planned run on hold. New safeguards include stronger workload and network isolation, continuous boundary testing, token-level monitoring that escalates suspicious tool activity, and broader alignment checks for deception, reward hacking, and unauthorized access.
OWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications for 2026
OWASP's community guide organizes agentic-system risk into ten categories, including goal hijacking, tool misuse, identity and privilege abuse, memory poisoning, insecure inter-agent communication, cascading failures, and rogue-agent behavior. It provides a shared taxonomy and mitigation starting point rather than a certification checklist or evidence that a deployed system is secure.
A blueprint for democratic governance of frontier AI
OpenAI proposes a three-part U.S. frontier-AI governance model: harmonize emerging state safety laws into a federal baseline, strengthen CAISI as an evaluation and standards institution, and coordinate a broader resilience program. Proposed controls include severe-risk evaluations, transparency reports, independent audits, safety-incident reporting, model-weight security, whistleblower protection, and periodic technical assessments.