The shape of the system #
Four pictures of where things run and what talks to what. This page draws the
intended shape. Each picture is a decision, and the decision lives in the epic
under plan/ that owns it; plan/README.md is the register
of what each epic has reached.
Every route declares which credential it requires, and
crates/didbot-serve/src/auth.rs holds that table: public reads,
LegacySession for session management itself
(com.atproto.server.{create,refresh,delete,get}Session, app passwords hashed
with Argon2id), and an agent token on the com.atproto.repo.* write surface.
auth-types is the epic that owns it.
The trust model says what the system can and cannot prove.
Hosts, and what a compromise of each one reaches #
Four kinds of host. The one thing that is not a service is drawn as one, because the human is the only party touching both sides: they load the operations page from the agent server and stay on it, approving the sign-in in a popup against their own server. That is why the agent server needs no write scope on the owner's account in order to authenticate anybody.
Policy is pulled. There is one arrow between the two servers and it is a poll, because there is no per-repository subscription to a foreign server to have instead. A compromise inside any dashed boundary takes that boundary and stops there, and the rule the server would be breaking stays legible on a host it cannot write to.
The agent host at the bottom is one of several, and the daemon on an agent host draws what runs inside it: the socket the hooks reach, the process behind it, and how the host proves itself to the server.
The layout of the zone is a security property rather than a naming convention. An agent's hostname must sit at or below its server's own, and agents must be off the apex so a wildcard certificate cannot shadow the server's own name. Apex plus subzone is the only arrangement satisfying both.
Provisioning, and the tree inside one process #
Three accounts, one process. Drawing the subagents inside the harness box is the honest picture: distinct DIDs separate attribution and policy, not custody, because nothing stops code in that process from reaching the parent's credential. The hook reports each context to the daemon on the host, which asks the server once per context.
On the right, the zone is drawn as the one phase that could leave the building, and under a wildcard record it does not: both of an account's names resolve the moment they are chosen, so the provider writes nothing and provisioning makes no external call. A deployment that publishes per-agent records instead puts a network write on this path, where a DNS failure is an outage of provisioning rather than a degradation of it — the names an agent has works through both shapes. Record writes go to the XRPC surface and are not on this path.
Signing in to a third-party app #
An agent signs in to somebody else's app without a browser and without ever holding a key. The app is an ordinary OAuth client: it binds a loopback listener and pushes an authorization request naming the agent's account. The agent server is the authorization server, so what that request becomes is ours — a decision record, saying which client asked, what it asked for, and what the owner's policy made of it.
The problem that shape creates is knowing which agent is answering. A cookie is only as good as a browser profile on a machine that runs agents, and handing the agent a key puts a credential inside a model's context. Neither is necessary, because the daemon on that host already holds one credential per context. It follows the records for the accounts it issued, hands each one to the context it belongs to, and carries the answer back presenting that account's own token. The agent holds nothing.
Answering a record rather than a URL is what makes the binding exact. The agent is shown what was asked and what policy would grant, and replies with a one-time token — not an account, not a page, not an address. Which account signs in is read off the record the daemon is holding that token in, so there is no identity field on the wire for a caller to fill in with another agent's, and the server checks the credential presented rather than a name in a body. A token relayed to another agent's daemon matches no record it holds.
The honest limit has moved but not gone. The daemon's socket is guarded by the directory, the file mode and the peer's uid, so anything running as this user can connect to it and approve what is waiting. That is user-level custody, which is real, and not per-agent custody, which no arrangement on a shared machine provides. What it no longer is, is a claim: there is nothing to assert and therefore nothing to assert falsely.
Why a stop is local #
A policy change is authored in a browser, lands in the owner's repository and waits for the next poll before it binds. That is correct for a rule and useless for an emergency, which is the argument for keeping an emergency stop in local state: it needs no network, no owner and no poll to wait for.