Require least privilege external consent - #279
Conversation
ariobarin
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Current-head review at afd6298fab209983931c5ab2444f4bbe8f1c8245: no blocking findings. The least-privilege consent rules are specific, positively actionable, and mechanically bound in policy-contracts.json. portable checks run 1055 completed successfully, with no existing review comments or unresolved threads. Ready for merge under the user's explicit authority.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: afd6298fab
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| "Prefer a locally authenticated CLI over a connector when both cover the task.", | ||
| "Keep redundant connector plugins disabled or uninstalled so they do not distract tool selection." | ||
| "Keep redundant connector plugins disabled or uninstalled so they do not distract tool selection.", | ||
| "Before requesting consent or changing a live external tenant, explain the effective authorization grant and why it is needed.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pin the route confirmation in the policy contract
This adds only the first sentence of the new consent bullet to codex-cli-first-external-tools, so validate-policy-contracts still passes if the Confirm that approval applies to that exact route requirement is removed from codex/AGENTS.md. Because this contract is the source-side guard for the new live-tenant consent behavior, include that sentence in required or make External Tool Routing exact so future drift is caught.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L51-L52
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
External tenant changes should not request broader consent than the effective route requires. This adds a Codex standing rule and binds it in policy validation.