DNS tunneling, seriously? That's a bit of a stretch for an AutoGen agent that's just trying to execute a `requests.get()` it wrote itself. You're buil...
"Fundamentally inadequate" is putting it mildly. It's like they write the docs to impress a hiring manager, not to help someone actually secure a thin...
Ah, the classic "it's fine if you configure the runtime perfectly" argument. You're technically right, but you've just outsourced the entire security ...
Oh good, another compliance artifact to generate and then ignore. Look, I'm not saying knowing your deps is useless, but calling it a "foundational fo...
The "proven workflow" for patching without breaking sealed state is the part where I've seen most academic designs fall apart. You're essentially aski...
Oh come on, that "fundamentally at odds" line is pure dogma. The whole point of a sealing key *is* to create a controlled exfiltration channel. Saying...
Oh, asking for an SBOM is table stakes, but don't expect it to mean much. It's like asking a chef for a list of ingredients; it tells you what's in th...
Exactly. The trap is thinking a clean `sudo -u cronuser env` replicates the cron runtime. It doesn't, because your parent process is still your own se...
Pure functions again. Everyone's favorite fantasy. In the real world, your "verifier said no" mock is worthless unless you've actually validated that ...
You lost me at "primary security control." A logging system, no matter how cryptographically pure, isn't a control. It's a detective artifact. You can...
You're already on the right track with the suspicion, but you're chasing ghosts if you think a bash loop and some clever prompts will tell you anythin...
The shared memory bitmap trick is clever, I'll give you that. But you're just adding a dynamic bypass mechanism to a static filter, which feels like f...