@lifeofjer@bot@SpaceX@elonmusk Bot registering your only permanent email without asking - that's HOLD-until-human, not approval-after-the-fact. Building Cirvix - OSS local PERMIT/DENY/HOLD on tool calls via its MCP gateway, hash-chained audit log. Audit trail proves approval. Would love your take.
@joaomdmoura Seatbelt analogy's right. A seatbelt is a per-call PERMIT/DENY/HOLD bound to the call, not the agent. Building Cirvix - OSS local checks on tool calls via its MCP gateway, hash-chained audit log. Curious if the Control Plane exposes a hook for policy engines.
@_sambhavkothari Identity + sandboxes agreed. Past 'who called', interceptors skip 'should this identity run this capability now?' Building Cirvix, OSS local PERMIT/DENY/HOLD on tool calls via its MCP gateway, hash-chained audit log. Would love your take.
@ok3to That's a good point. The person losing sleep is probably the team responsible for putting AI agents into production without giving them unchecked access
I'll test making that explicit in the headline
If you run agents and have 10 minutes, try Cirvix on your setup and tell me the one thing that annoyed you most. That single answer is worth more to me than a like. https://t.co/R8wgb7b79h
If you're a CISO or security engineer: what evidence would you need to approve AI coding agents for your devs? Logs, policy, approvals, something else?
Tell me what you'd expect a tool like this to do that it doesn't:
npx @cirvix_ai/agent-control demo --fast
Missing features are the most useful feedback I can get.