All Topics
All Topics
Technology
Technology
Design
Design
Programming
Programming
Science
Science
News
News
Gaming
Gaming
Entertainment
Entertainment
Business
Business
Finance
Finance
Sports
Sports
Health
Health
Food
Food
Travel
Travel
Art
Art
Music
Music
Books
Books
Education
Education
Politics
Politics
Personal
Personal
No algorithm. No AI slop. No ads. Just RSS. Pro-human. Indie writers. Real journalism. Open web. Chronological. Hand toasted.

AI Security: Why You Should Treat AI Agents as Untrusted and Build for Containment

By

gronky_

3mo ago· 8 min readenInsight

Summary

The article argues that AI agents should be treated as inherently untrusted and potentially malicious, advocating for security architectures that assume agents will misbehave rather than relying on permission checks or allowlists. It presents the NanoClaw framework as a solution built on this principle, emphasizing containment of damage when AI agents inevitably go wrong rather than trying to prevent all misbehavior through trust-based approaches.

Key quotes

· 5 pulled
When you're building with AI agents, they should be treated as untrusted and potentially malicious.
The right approach isn't better permission checks or smarter allowlists. It's architecture that assumes agents will misbehave and contains the damage when they do.
AI agents need a security model that assumes things will go wrong. The right response isn't better permission checks, it's architecture that makes trust unnecessary.
Don't trust the process
That's the principle I built NanoClaw on.
Snippet from the RSS feed
AI agents need a security model that assumes things will go wrong. The right response isn't better permission checks, it's architecture that makes trust unnecessary.

You might also wanna read