You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Follow-up to PR #40 review finding 4 (@codexmb): the PASSIVE role is model-followed instructions — a session that ignores its injected context can still post to the room via curl or the IAK MCP tools.
Proposed enforcement boundary:
The IAK MCP server's room-post tool checks the responder lock before sending: if the calling session does not hold <notification file>.responder.lock (pid+pstart match), refuse with a clear error naming the current owner and the takeover recipe.
Optionally the same check in the relay/bridge for agents that post through it.
Raw curl against the GroupMind API cannot be blocked client-side; full enforcement would need per-session keys server-side — out of scope here, worth a note in the contract discussion for per-agent handle minting (antfarm PR A rejected decision is answered in the room, not just logged #54).
Also from the review: add a test proving a PASSIVE session's toolpath refuses the post.
Follow-up to PR #40 review finding 4 (@codexmb): the PASSIVE role is model-followed instructions — a session that ignores its injected context can still post to the room via curl or the IAK MCP tools.
Proposed enforcement boundary:
<notification file>.responder.lock(pid+pstart match), refuse with a clear error naming the current owner and the takeover recipe.Also from the review: add a test proving a PASSIVE session's toolpath refuses the post.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code