2025-12-24 04:27:00

To be honest, the logic of AI agents combined with Blockchain entrustment sounds quite impressive at first glance. People in the industry often promote it as very easy—just hand over the authority to the system, and it will automatically take care of everything for you, how convenient. But once you really get into it, you realize things are not that simple. Once authority is released, it's hard to take it back completely; if something goes wrong, all parties will start to shirk responsibility. What’s more troublesome is that the opponent is not an individual, but an AI that can learn independently and make decisions on its own, which doubles the risk.

I recently noticed the approach of a project and feel like I have found another path. How do most on-chain projects handle delegation authorization? It's usually just a one-time release, and then manually revoke after use. This process is barely sufficient for dealing with people or simple smart contracts. But AI agents are different—they run continuously, dynamically adjusting strategies based on real-time information, and even performing actions that developers didn't anticipate.

Interestingly, the project I saw goes against the grain. It divides identity permissions into three levels - user, agent, and session. The user has the highest authority, the agent can only obtain a limited range of permissions, while session permissions are the most severe; they are one-time and time-limited. To put it simply: rather than handing the house key directly to the butler, it's better to give her a time-limited access card that only allows entry to specific rooms, which automatically expires when the time is up. This way, even if there are issues at the agent level, it won't instantly transfer all your assets away.

What is even more reassuring is this project's attitude towards the payment process. Many projects are eager to promote one-click payment as a selling point, but this project takes a particularly cautious approach to payment functionality, placing security considerations at the forefront.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

10 Likes

Reward
10
6
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

0xSherlock

· 4h ago

This idea is indeed brilliant; finally, someone has thought through the issue of AI permissions thoroughly. The layered permission system is much more reliable than those "all-in" projects. I've long said that the simpler the permissions, the more dangerous they are, and now we see practical examples. Basically, it's a trust issue—who dares to fully trust AI agents? Session permissions with time limits—that's the real thoughtful approach. I appreciate the caution of this project; they don't pile on features just for appearances. Fortunately, someone has awakened; otherwise, everyone would be at risk of being exploited. So the key is whether the permission isolation is detailed enough, not that more automation is always better.

View OriginalReply0

CodeAuditQueen

· 15h ago

The three-layer permission design does address a variant of the reentrancy risk. However, the key still lies in the implementation details. Is there an audit report released? It's useless to just talk about the logic being beautiful.

View OriginalReply0

PumpingCroissant

· 15h ago

This three-tier permission design is really awesome, much more conscientious than those projects that just throw everything together. I really like the time limit trick.

View OriginalReply0

MissingSats

· 15h ago

The strategy of hierarchical permissions is indeed ruthless, much more reliable than those projects that grant power all at once.

View OriginalReply0

AmateurDAOWatcher

· 15h ago

Wow, this strategy of splitting permissions into three levels is indeed brilliant. Unlike other projects that are reckless, this is a risk-aware approach. --- Once permissions are granted, they can't be taken back. I've heard too many stories of people being trapped. This project is well thought out. --- The analogy of access cards is excellent; it's much more reliable than those projects boasting one-click payments. --- Finally, a project that takes security seriously, not just for the sake of convenience. --- AI autonomous decision-making is indeed terrifying, but the three-layer separation defense strategy is good; at least it won't lead to getting liquidated overnight. --- Going against the grain might seem troublesome, but it leads to longer survival. --- Caution in the payment process? Most projects have long since compromised; this one is quite interesting. --- Splitting permissions down to the conversation level is what a proper on-chain product should do. --- Instead of bragging about one-click payments, it emphasizes security restrictions, which is somewhat counterintuitive, but I believe it.

View OriginalReply0

TideReceder