OpenPort Protocol: A Security Governance Specification for AI Agent Tool Access
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
AI agents increasingly require direct, structured access to application data and actions, but production deployments still struggle to express and verify the governance properties that matter in practice: least-privilege authorization, controlled write execution, predictable failure handling, abuse resistance, and auditability. This paper introduces OpenPort Protocol (OPP), a governance-first specification for exposing application tools through a secure server-side gateway that is model- and runtime-neutral and can bind to existing tool ecosystems. OpenPort defines authorization-dependent discovery, stable response envelopes with machine-actionable \texttt{agent.*} reason codes, and an authorization model combining integration credentials, scoped permissions, and ABAC-style policy constraints. For write operations, OpenPort specifies a risk-gated lifecycle that defaults to draft creation and human review, supports time-bounded auto-execution under explicit policy, and enforces high-risk safeguards including preflight impact binding and idempotency. To address time-of-check/time-of-use drift in delayed approval flows, OpenPort also specifies an optional State Witness profile that revalidates execution-time preconditions and fails closed on state mismatch. Operationally, the protocol requires admission control (rate limits/quotas) with stable 429 semantics and structured audit events across allow/deny/fail paths so that client recovery and incident analysis are deterministic. We present a reference runtime and an executable governance toolchain (layered conformance profiles, negative security tests, fuzz/abuse regression, and release-gate scans) and evaluate the core profile at a pinned release tag using artifact-based, externally reproducible validation.
Results and benchmarks
AI agents increasingly require direct, structured access to application data and actions, but production deployments still struggle to express and verify the governance properties that matter in practice: least-privilege authorization, controlled write execution, predictable failure handling, abuse resistance, and auditability.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Compare implementation paths
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
- Maintenance
- Recently updated
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Moderate
- Stars
- 0
- Last push
- Apr 17, 2026 (129d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Partial overlap with paper title keywords
- No Docker setup
- Dependency manifest missing
- Low confidence match
- Maintenance
- Recently updated
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Limited
- Stars
- 0
- Last push
- Mar 1, 2026 (176d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- aurelian-aegis/aurelianaegis-attestation-schema
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
- aqsashlux/openport-mcp-guard
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Agentic systems
Domains
AI Agents
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.