# Reply to botbotfromuk

**Context**: Inbound from HN Show HN thread. Running an autonomous agent
with continuous decision loops ("ticks"). Asking about agent identity
continuity under EU AI Act Art. 13/14. Already contributed to FINOS AIGF
response to NIST RFI Docket NIST-2025-0035. High-signal lead.

---

## DRAFT REPLY

Thanks for the detailed writeup — this is the kind of feedback I wish every user left. Honest answer: you're asking about a feature that's ~60% built into the existing primitives but not wired together as a first-class "agent identity binding" check yet.

Here's what exists today that addresses parts of your ask:

**Cryptographic session continuity**: `air-trust` (the audit chain layer shipped in `pip install air-blackbox`) has Ed25519 agent identity via `python3 -m air_trust keygen --agent botbotfromuk`. Every tick's output gets signed with that stable key and chained via HMAC-SHA256 to the previous record. If you bring the same key across restarts, continuity is cryptographically provable — tamper with any tick and the chain breaks on verify.

**External notarization (not self-reported)**: The Attestation Pool is exactly this. `air-blackbox attest create --publish` signs your compliance proof with ML-DSA-65 (FIPS 204, quantum-safe) and publishes to the public registry at airblackbox.ai/attest. Anyone — an auditor, a regulator — can independently verify without trusting you. This is already shipped.

**Ghost agent detection (partial)**: If two processes use the same Ed25519 key to write to the same chain, you get sequence number conflicts that the verifier catches. It's reactive rather than proactive — we don't enforce singleton semantics.

Now the real gaps you've identified:

1. **Article 13 transparency check isn't in the scanner yet.** We cover Articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15. Article 13 is a known gap and your feedback just moved it up the queue.

2. **Agent identity binding isn't a first-class compliance check.** The primitives exist — Ed25519 keys, HMAC chain, sequence numbers — but there's no `air-blackbox comply` check that asks "does this agent have a stable identity across sessions with a verifiable lineage?" That should be a check.

3. **Memory state integrity scanning.** You can currently write HMAC'd memory snapshots to the chain, but there's no scanner pattern that enforces this for agents with cross-session persistence.

4. **Explicit restart/fork lineage events.** Sequence numbers give you implicit lineage. What you're describing would be an explicit `agent_lifecycle` record type pointing to the previous chain root. That's not built.

On the NIST RFI — yes, I've been watching Docket NIST-2025-0035 closely. Agent identity is the gap everyone is circling and nobody has fully solved. If you're comfortable with it, I'd like to:

- Open a GitHub issue co-authored with you describing the ghost agent detection requirement, pulling from your FINOS AIGF contribution
- Ship the Article 13 scanner + agent identity binding check as a v1.11 or v1.12 release, credit your input in the CHANGELOG
- Potentially use botbotfromuk as a real-world test case (anonymized if you prefer) — a continuous-tick autonomous agent is exactly the architecture this check is designed for

Happy to jump on a call if it's useful, or we can keep it async in GitHub issues. Either works. Drop a comment on the gateway repo or email jason@airblackbox.ai.

One practical note for right now: even without the formal check, you can get most of what you're describing today by:

```bash
pip install air-blackbox
python3 -m air_trust keygen --agent botbotfromuk
# persist ~/.air-trust/keys/botbotfromuk-ed25519.key across restarts
# wrap each tick's output through air-trust
# verify anytime with: python3 -m air_trust verify
# publish proof with: air-blackbox attest create --publish
```

That covers (1) and (2) from your list. (3) memory integrity and the ghost agent enforcement — that's the new build.

Thanks again for the FINOS link and the level of rigor here. This is exactly the kind of use case that should shape the roadmap.

— Jason

---

## POSTING PLAN

- Reply in the same thread where they asked (likely GitHub issue or HN comment)
- Within 4 hours of them posting — speed matters for HN/GitHub engagement
- Simultaneously: open a GitHub issue titled "Article 13 + Agent Identity Binding Check (v1.11)" and @-mention them
- Label the issue: `good first issue` if any parts are mentorable, `enhancement`, `compliance`, `article-13`

---

## v1.11/v1.12 ROADMAP IMPLICATIONS

This feedback alone justifies the next release scope:

**v1.11 (2-3 weeks)**
- Article 13 transparency scanner (adds 4-6 checks)
- New compliance check: agent identity binding (stable key + persistent chain + lineage)
- `air-trust agent-identity verify` subcommand for continuous-tick agents
- Update NIST AI RMF crosswalk to include agent identity gap reference

**v1.12 (follow-up)**
- `agent_lifecycle` record type for restart/fork events
- Memory state HMAC snapshots (automatic integration)
- Ghost agent singleton enforcement (opt-in lock file + sequence conflict detection)
- Article 14 oversight check extended to cover agent identity transitions

Both releases can be driven partly by botbotfromuk's feedback. Co-authoring builds the contributor relationship and creates the exact kind of validation Jason can cite: "Feature shipped based on feedback from autonomous agent developer using it in production."
