🤫husshhussh
🤫husshhusshOnePuppy
Implemented · Distributed systems · authorization · agents

Can consent become a type system for agents?

PCHP names identity, purpose, exact scope, validity, delivery, and receipt. The engineering question is whether those attributes can become machine-checkable invariants across a multi-tool agent plan, instead of natural-language promises around one.

Read the companion essayAll open problems
Problem statement

The hard question.

Define a grant algebra in which a plan cannot gain authority by composition: every executed tool call must remain inside the active subject, purpose, exact scope, validity window, and revocation state.

Agents increasingly plan across tools, connectors, and services. A permission string that is clear for one RPC becomes ambiguous once the model can compose five calls and retry them.

Status

What is true today.

The code has signed, subject-bound, TTL-capped tokens, a generated scope registry, and an action-tool consent gate. Registry validation at mint and a unified durable grant model remain open seams.

Primary source: PCHP implementation status

Constraints

The work is only useful if these survive.

  • A published registry and token mint need one vocabulary.
  • Read paths cannot become covert mutations.
  • Expiry and revocation must invalidate a plan already in flight.
  • Receipts must explain a decision without recording the private payload.
Evaluation

How we would know.

Property tests for intersection, expiry, revocation, delegation, and retries.
Adversarial plans that attempt scope widening across connectors.
A trace showing the exact grant used for every action-capable tool call.
A first contribution

Start with something that can fail.

Build a minimal typed grant algebra and property-based test suite. The first success condition is simple: no composed plan may execute outside the intersection of its live grants.

Read it plainly, then make it better.

The companion essay is written for a broader technical audience. The repository and developer community are the places to turn a claim into a contribution.

Companion essayJoin Discord

🤫 One is made by Hushh Technologies Corporation, an independent company. We name the hardware and clouds One runs on to say where it runs. None of them endorse us, and we call a company a partner only once the agreement is signed.