ROOTVIELROOTVIEL
← Technology

Technology

Implemented9 min

Agentic orchestration, deterministic enforcement

Agents reason and replan; that is non-deterministic by nature. Authority must not be. ROOTVIEL keeps the power to act outside the model, as deny-by-default rules a human can read.

The principle

The design principle the whole platform is built around: agents may reason, propose and coordinate, but the authority to act lives outside the language model, applied by code. Persuading the model is therefore never sufficient to cause harm — because the model was never where the decision to allow an action was made.

The identity provider authenticates; ROOTVIEL authorizes. The code asks for permissions, not roles — it checks "may this principal approve an assessment?", never "is this principal an approver?". Roles map to frozen sets of permissions; a role with no mapping can do nothing, and a new permission is held by nobody until it is assigned. Deny-by-default, in both directions.

Allow-lists and a single gate

Enforcement is fail-closed everywhere. Token verification uses an explicit algorithm allow-list and never the token’s own declared algorithm. The capability catalog is validated against a closed family list before anything is signed. The signer refuses any key or signature that is not the expected Ed25519 shape.

Inside the agent, every tool call passes a single enforcement gate with deny-by-default checks in a fixed order: is the capability valid, is the honest risk floor acceptable, does the profile permit it, does a grant cover it. The agent cannot skip the gate, and it cannot self-authorize — the grant comes from a human operator, never from the agent’s own reasoning.

Segregation of duties and step-up

The requester of an assessment cannot be its approver — a reviewer role exists precisely so that whoever approves need not, and must not, be able to create what they approve. Sensitive capabilities also require step-up: a strong, recent authentication whose freshness window scales with blast radius. A reversible daily analysis accepts a wide window; approving a live test or transferring ownership demands a very recent strong authentication. The control does not run a second factor itself — it verifies what the identity provider attests, and absence of a strong signal is treated as weak, never strong.

Delegation that can only attenuate

When one agent delegates to another, authority can only shrink. A child’s authority is a subset of its parent’s across every dimension — organization, scope, capabilities, grants, risk and budget. Attenuation is monotone downward: information may grow as the investigation proceeds, but authority never does. An attempt to escalate is rejected at the first dimension that tried.

Verified

A useful consequence: counters that measure what executed stay at zero when an action is denied. A blocked attempt is not quietly counted as work done.

Isolation as a property of the database

One platform operates on many organizations’ systems, so a missed tenant filter is a cross-client leak. Isolation is enforced in three layers: the tenant travels in a context set once from the verified token; repositories read the tenant from that context, never as a parameter, so a cross-tenant query is not even expressible; and the database applies row-level security per transaction.

Verified

A real finding worth sharing: database superusers bypass row-level security entirely, which would make every policy silently decorative. The fix is to run the application under a non-superuser role — and the test that proves it runs against a real database with that role, because an in-memory database would have passed green and hidden the gap.

References

  1. [1]Saltzer & Schroeder, The Protection of Information in Computer Systems (1975)
  2. [2]NIST SP 800-53 AC-5 (separation of duties), AC-6 (least privilege)
  3. [3]RFC 8725 — JSON Web Token Best Current Practices
  4. [4]PostgreSQL — Row Security Policies

References point to public, well-known technical sources for further study.

Related articles