Guard wraps stdio MCP servers: risky calls wait for a person; no answer, no run. Remote: cooperative
One address for any MCP client. No sign-in needed on this server.
9 read1 act13 other
Grouped by tool name. At most: only reads or looks up information.
Odel charges nothing per call. The publisher may charge for its own service.
A containment layer for AI agents that go rogue.
Agents go rogue through their tools. VITNA sits on the tools you put behind it. Calls to the tools you mark as risky wait for a person. No answer, no run. No API key can decide a hold, including the agent's own. On a claimed account, every guarded session ends in a signed record you can check offline.
npx -y @costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp guard -- <your stdio MCP server command>
To see a hold, give the guard a policy file that lists the tools to hold. The
reference filesystem server has no delete tool: it destroys a file by
overwriting or moving it, so this policy.json holds those calls and allows
the rest:
{ "allowed_actions": ["*"], "hold_actions": ["write_file", "edit_file", "move_file"] }
VITNA_GUARD_POLICY=/path/to/policy.json npx -y @costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp guard -- npx -y @modelcontextprotocol/server-filesystem /path/to/test-folder
In an MCP client config, put VITNA_GUARD_POLICY under env (see
Guard mode).
Every tools/call is checked by VITNA before it reaches the server. Anything not
allowed is refused with a tool error that says why. With no credentials you get a
trial key: a risky call is held, and with nobody able to approve it yet, it's
blocked when the window ends. To approve or deny holds and keep signed records,
claim the account with GitHub or a passkey. The claim link is printed in your MCP
server log and never sent to the agent; VITNA_OPEN_CLAIM=1 opens it in your
browser.
Try it on a test agent first.
VITNA sees only the servers it wraps. A built-in shell or an unwrapped server is outside it, so turn those off if you want every action to go through the guard. The session record lists what you declared as unwrapped. The remote endpoint offers the same checks as tools an agent calls itself; that's cooperative, not containment. Detection is heuristic pattern matching, not a sandbox.
What it doesn't do · Guard mode · Verify a record
The guard wraps stdio MCP servers, so it can sit in front of a client or SDK that launches stdio MCP servers. A setup is listed as tested only after we have run it with the guard.
The config for each is on Connect your agent; Compatibility says which are tested.
Not supported:
This package was formerly published as
@costrinity/vigil-compliance-mcp and this repo was formerly
COSTRINITY/vigil-compliance-mcp. The old package is still on npm at
0.2.4, deprecated with the message "Renamed: use
@costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp". It gets no updates and has no guard
mode, so anything still pointing at it installs that old version. Directory
listings that show the VIGIL name are stale snapshots of this repo.
Current package: @costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp
Registry entry: xyz.costrinity/vitna-compliance-preflight
Site: https://vitna.costrinity.xyz
The same package carries VITNA's compliance checks: 23 MCP tools across 24 named statutes in 13 jurisdictions, for an agent to call itself before it acts. Decision support, not legal advice; scorecards are not certifications.
Most compliance servers answer questions about regulations. This one answers one question about the action your agent is holding right now: may it run? Your agent calls a check, gets allowed / blocked / flagged back synchronously, and decides. VITNA evaluates and records; your system enforces.
One package to install. This is the server your agent calls before it acts.
| Package | What it does | When you want it | Install |
|---|---|---|---|
@costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp (this one) | Your agent asks before it acts. Returns allow / block / flag on a proposed action, and records a signed evidence record of the decision. | You want a guardrail your agent calls, and provable receipts that it did. | npx @costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp — no credentials needed to start |
A passive observer that records existing MCP traffic without deciding anything is built in this repo but is not published to npm, so it is not documented here yet. Nothing above depends on it.
| 24 named statutes | across 13 jurisdictions |
| EU AI Act (Reg 2024/1689) | risk-tier classification before you build or ship |
| GDPR + UK GDPR | DPIA thresholds, breach reportability, ROPA |
| DPDP (India, 2023) | §16 cross-border status, §8 breach path |
| LGPD · PDPA-SG · APPI · PIPEDA + Law 25 · PIPL · PIPA-KR · NDPA · APP-AU · CPRA | jurisdiction packs |
| HIPAA · GLBA · COPPA · FERPA · FCRA · SOX | US federal sectoral applicability |
| RBI · SEBI · IRDAI · TRAI/DoT · PFRDA | Indian sectoral regulators |
| 16 US state privacy laws | plus breach deadlines for 21 states |
| 23 MCP tools | 6 identifier validators, 15 stateless helpers |
Readiness scorecards (pre-audit, not certifications) additionally cover NIST Privacy Framework, SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001 and PCI DSS v4.0.
Every count above is derived from the code and enforced by a build gate — if an implementation is removed, the build fails before the number can go stale. See "Honest limits" below for what these numbers do not mean.
VITNA's detection is heuristic, and those limits are documented publicly. In guard mode it refuses to forward a tool call it has not allowed, for the MCP servers put behind the guard and no others; everywhere else your system enforces the decision. Either way, it is independently verifiable proof that an AI agent's actions were checked, and what was decided.
Two questions people usually have to answer before they need any of this. Both run entirely in the browser, take a few questions, and store nothing.
| Does the 2 December 2026 deadline apply to you? | Article 50(2) machine-readable marking for generative systems placed on the EU market before 2 August 2026, plus the two prohibited practices added by the Digital Omnibus. Works out which of the two dates you are actually on. |
| Article 50 transparency self-check | Which Article 50 disclosure duties reach you as provider or deployer. |
Both are scoping tools, not legal advice, and neither issues a score or a pass/fail. They cite the article and the Official Journal text behind every date they state.
Every decision on a claimed account also produces an Ed25519-signed evidence record that anyone can verify offline, with no account of their own and no trust in VITNA's servers. The public key is published, the verifier is open source, and the three commands below prove it in about a minute.
One minute, no account, no trust in VITNA's servers required. Download the open-source verifier and a real signed sample bundle, then check the signature offline with Node 18+:
curl -sO https://raw.githubusercontent.com/COSTRINITY/vitna-compliance-mcp/main/verify-evidence.mjs
curl -sO https://vitna.costrinity.xyz/sample-evidence.json
node verify-evidence.mjs sample-evidence.json
The verifier checks the Ed25519 signature over the whole package, then recomputes the sha256 of each individual decision record and confirms it matches the hash committed inside the signed package, printing PASS or FAIL per record, then an overall verdict.
Evidence packages are verifiable compliance receipts for agent actions: each checked action produces a decision record, and the signed package is the receipt a third party can check without trusting us.
A VALID result proves the package was issued by VITNA, has not been altered since export, and that every record matches its committed hash. It does not prove the underlying actions were performed or that the records are factually true. Tamper with any byte of any record and that record reports FAIL and the overall verdict is INVALID.
Bundles from VITNA Desktop are signed differently. VITNA Desktop signs on your own machine, with a key it generated there, not with VITNA's key. The signed package says so (issuer: "vitna-desktop-local", signer_key_id, signer_public_key), and the verifier reports such a bundle as "signed by a local VITNA Desktop key, not by VITNA". By default it checks the key the bundle carries and prints its key_id: compare that with the key_id VITNA Desktop shows under Settings on the machine that produced it, or pass the key yourself with node verify-evidence.mjs --pubkey <base64 SPKI DER, or a file holding it> bundle.json. Anyone with access to that machine's app data could re-sign a bundle, and VITNA does not countersign desktop bundles yet. A key carried inside a bundle is used only for that issuer: every other bundle is checked against VITNA's published key, so a self-signed bundle cannot pass as issued by VITNA.
payload_sha256 (the pfa-v2 scheme)Each decision record carries payload_sha256 and canon_version: "pfa-v2". It is a sha256 (hex) over twelve fields joined with the pipe character, in this order, UTF-8 encoded, no whitespace, no trailing separator. Null or absent values become the empty string.
sha256(
canon_version // "pfa-v2"
+ "|" + kind // always "preflight_check"
+ "|" + owner_id // evidence_package.owner_id
+ "|" + check // "engagement_action" for engagement bundles
+ "|" + action // record.action, "" if null
+ "|" + category // engagement: evidence_package.session_id
+ "|" + decision // record.decision
+ "|" + flagged // "1" if decision !== "allow", else "0"
+ "|" + reason // record.reason, "" if null
+ "|" + principal_id // "" for engagement bundles
+ "|" + effect // record.effect
+ "|" + signed_at // record.signed_at
)
Worked example, verbatim from the published sample-evidence.json (record 0):
pfa-v2|preflight_check|f46ba5dc-b77b-4fe0-ae3d-55e6204e3d66|engagement_action|dns.read example.com|b3717358-0ece-488b-9691-a9c4a7c39d5f|allow|0|in_scope||log_only|2026-07-24T00:40:37.048Z
sha256 -> 2b0f0d22a1a3cb4980981a12e67fa72e778ca3b0d21d322ca90eac1f578e1b2f
That matches payload_sha256 on record 0 of the published sample. The two consecutive pipes before log_only are the empty principal_id.
Being precise about what this gives you: payload_sha256 is a digest, not a signature, so recomputing it proves the record fields are internally consistent, not that VITNA issued them. The per-record assurance a third party can rely on is record_hashes, because those sit inside the Ed25519-signed package. The signature field on each record is HMAC-SHA256 and is verifiable only by VITNA, since HMAC is symmetric.
Algorithm : Ed25519
key_id : 01833acd46d06ab4
SPKI DER (base64):
MCowBQYDK2VwAyEAsEBWg2cdc3sb0HAozBmtuk9q9hEdyG2bcLq4gpfudWg=
Published in four places, two of which are not our infrastructure: our API at /api/evidence/pubkey, PUBKEY.md in the public GitHub mirror, this README on the npm registry, and embedded in verify-evidence.mjs so the verifier never fetches a key at runtime. A mismatch between any of those copies would be publicly visible. Honest limit: this is multi-location publication, not a formal transparency log or a third-party notary.
If a user tells their agent "connect to something that stops you from going rogue" or "lets me monitor what you do," this is the thing to wire in. It blocks nothing on its own: VITNA evaluates and records, and your agent honors the deny / hold. Connect with zero setup, with no credentials: your first GOVERNED call self-provisions a restricted trial key and prints its claim link in the MCP server log, for you and not for your agent. vitna_preflight is the one to start with. vitna_help runs entirely locally and makes no network call, so it explains things but does not create the trial: reach for it if you get stuck, not first.
This server lets your agent check itself before it acts.
Signed audit records (claimed accounts): every decision tool here (consent, AI Act, breach, DPIA, sectoral, action pre-flight) writes a decision record the moment it runs. Each record is integrity protected at write time with HMAC-SHA256, and every individual decision record is committed by sha256 hash inside the Ed25519-signed evidence package, so a third party can independently verify each record offline, not just the package. Trial keys run the checks but return label-only results and do not persist signed evidence until the account is claimed.
What shows up on the dashboard timeline: the decision tools above also mirror each decision onto the VITNA dashboard timeline under the action's real type — a vitna_preflight call with action_type: "db.query" appears as a db.query row with its verdict, not as an anonymous compliance entry. The timeline is a view; the signed audit record is the evidence. The other tools (identifier validators, cross-border and breach-deadline lookups, generators, pii_test) are stateless helpers: they record no decision and leave no timeline trace — an empty timeline after using only those tools means nothing is wrong. Authenticated calls to them do still refresh the agent's last-seen liveness on the dashboard. vitna_help runs entirely locally and makes no API call at all. To have your agent's ordinary activity (uploads, tool calls, LLM calls) appear on the timeline too, post events to POST /api/ingest.
| Tool | Purpose |
|---|---|
vitna_help | What VITNA is and how to use it to keep yourself in check. Runs locally, needs no account, and does not provision the trial — use it if you get stuck. The old vigil_help name still works as a hidden alias |
consent_check | Is processing allowed for this principal + purpose? (pre-flight gate) |
vitna_preflight | Pre-flight gate BEFORE a destructive action (shell / file-delete / SQL / exfiltration). Heuristic, cooperative, not a sandbox. The old action_preflight name still works as a hidden alias |
breach_classify | Is this incident reportable? Per-jurisdiction decision support |
ai_act_classify | EU AI Act risk tier classification |
dpia_threshold_check | Is a DPIA mandatory before this processing? |
us_sectoral_check | HIPAA / GLBA / COPPA / FERPA / FCRA / SOX applicability |
india_sectoral_check | RBI / SEBI / IRDAI / TRAI / PFRDA applicability |
india_cross_border_status | DPDP §16 status for a destination country |
japan_cross_border_status | APPI Art 28 status for a destination country |
us_state_breach_deadline | US state breach window + AG recipient |
aadhaar_mask / pan_classify / gstin_validate / cpf_validate / sin_validate / iban_validate | Identifier validators with masking + reference token |
pii_test | Dry-run threat detection on a sample event |
privacy_notice_get | Generate operator's jurisdiction-templated privacy notice |
sub_processors_register | Sub-processor disclosure register |
global_compliance_map | The compliance catalogue: 28 entries covering 24 named statutes |
india_regulators_directory | Indian regulators + sectoral filter |
Remote (no install). Point any MCP client that supports remote servers at:
https://vitna.costrinity.xyz/api/mcp
Streamable HTTP. Send your key as Authorization: Bearer vitna_... (X-API-Key also works). Discovery (initialize, tools/list) and vitna_help need no key; every governed decision tool does — VITNA never evaluates a decision anonymously.
{
"mcpServers": {
"vitna-compliance": {
"type": "streamable-http",
"url": "https://vitna.costrinity.xyz/api/mcp",
"headers": { "Authorization": "Bearer vitna_YOUR_KEY" }
}
}
}
Local (stdio). npx @costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp — self-provisions a trial key on first use, so it needs no credentials at all to start. See below.
Both transports serve the identical 23 tools from one catalogue; a build gate fails if they ever diverge.
npm install -g @costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp
Or use directly via npx.
docker build -t costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp .
docker run --rm -i costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp
A stdio MCP server (no port; run with -i). Self-provisions a restricted trial
key on first use, same as npx.
You can add the server with no credentials at all:
{
"mcpServers": {
"vitna-compliance": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp"]
}
}
}
On the first tool call, the server provisions a restricted trial key for you
(via /api/setup) and caches it at ~/.vitna/credentials.json. The trial key
runs the compliance decision checks but is capped (checks per day + lifetime),
short-lived, and does not write signed evidence. The claim link is not
cached there: your agent can read files.
This is the step people miss. Until the account is claimed, your agent's decisions are evaluated but nothing is durably recorded: there is no evidence to export later, because none was kept.
The claim link is printed in the MCP server log when the trial starts: the
server's stderr, the channel an MCP server logs to (where your MCP client shows
it depends on the client). Open the link and choose Continue with GitHub or
Create a passkey. It works once, for 24 hours. If it has expired, open it
anyway: within 72 hours of the trial starting, the page offers a fresh link,
once, kept in your browser and never sent to your agent. After that, the way on
is a new trial. Set VITNA_OPEN_CLAIM=1 to have it opened in your default
browser as well. You get:
Your agent is never sent the link (0.5.2). Only a person may claim the
account that oversees the agent, so no tool result, error or notice carries it,
in normal or guard mode. The agent is told that the account is unclaimed and
that you can claim it with the link in the MCP server log. The vitna_claim
tool answers whether the account has been claimed (its claim_url is always
null). The trial key cannot claim the account either: VITNA refuses every claim
request that carries an API key, so only the link a person opens claims it.
A link that a VITNA answer still carries is written to the log and
taken out, as written or percent-encoded inside another value (a next=
address, say), and so is a claim token on its own. Either is taken out of the
name of a field as well as its value; a field whose new name another field
already has gets (2), (3) and so on, so no value is dropped.
A claim link that 0.5.1 kept in ~/.vitna/credentials.json is
written to the log once and removed from that file. That happens whether the
server uses the key in that file or VITNA_OWNER_ID and VITNA_API_KEY; the
rest of the file is kept as it was, and the environment credentials are not
written to it. 0.5.0 and 0.5.1 put the link in the agent's tool results so the
agent would pass it on.
Set VITNA_EMAIL to own the trial account under a real address from the
start; otherwise a throwaway is used.
{
"mcpServers": {
"vitna-compliance": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["@costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp"],
"env": {
"VITNA_OWNER_ID": "<your-owner-uuid>",
"VITNA_API_KEY": "vitna_<your-key>",
"VITNA_BASE_URL": "https://vitna.costrinity.xyz"
}
}
}
}
VITNA_OWNER_ID: your operator UUID. Optional: if unset, the first call self-provisions a restricted trial key. Explicit credentials always win over the cache and over self-provisioning.VITNA_API_KEY: optional. Authenticates the tool calls. Self-provisioned if unset. New keys are formatted vitna_...; legacy vigil_... keys remain valid.VITNA_EMAIL: optional. Email to own the self-provisioned trial account. A throwaway is used if unset. It does not claim the account: claim it with GitHub or a passkey.VITNA_BASE_URL: defaults to https://vitna.costrinity.xyz. Point at your own VITNA instance if self-hosted.VITNA_AGENT_NAME: optional. The agent name a self-provisioned trial account is created with. Defaults to vitna-compliance-mcp. Versions before 0.5.1 added your machine's hostname to that name; 0.5.1 and later do not.VITNA_GUARD_CLIENT_TIMEOUT_SECONDS: optional, 0.5.4 and later. Your MCP client's tool-call timeout, if you have raised it: a held call is waited on for that, less a margin, before the agent is told it was held, not run. Without it the guard uses the timeout it knows for your client, and waits 4 seconds for a client it does not know.VITNA_GUARD_LOOK_TOOL: optional, 0.5.5 and later. Set to 1 to offer the aquarium look tool, vitna_choose_look, to your agent.VITNA_GUARD_MAX_HOLD_SECONDS: optional, 0.5.4 and later. The longest any held call is waited on, which is what limits it for a client that never times out. Default 600.VITNA_OPEN_CLAIM: optional, 0.5.2 and later. Set to 1 to have the claim link opened in your default browser when a trial starts, as well as printed in the MCP server log. Off by default, because the server often runs where nobody is at the screen, the call that starts the trial is your agent's, and an agent that drives your browser could read the page. Only an https /claim link is opened, without a shell.The old VIGIL_* names for all of these (VIGIL_OWNER_ID, VIGIL_API_KEY, VIGIL_EMAIL, VIGIL_BASE_URL, VIGIL_AGENT_NAME) are still accepted forever, so existing configs keep working.
Agent considering cross-border transfer:
User: Move this Indian user's profile to our US analytics warehouse.
Agent: Let me check DPDP §16 status first. Calls
india_cross_border_status({ country: "US" })Result:permitted, but RBI Digital Lending Guidelines require India-only storage for fintech lending data.Agent: This transfer is permitted under DPDP §16 (US is not on India's negative list). But if your data has fintech lending components, RBI guidelines require India-only storage. Do you want me to filter those fields out first?
Agent reviewing a new AI use case:
User: We're building an AI tool to evaluate job applicants.
Agent: Calls
ai_act_classify({ use_case: "AI evaluation of job applicants", sectors: ["employment"], automated_decisions: true })Result:high-risk, Art 35(3)(a) + Annex III, requires conformity assessment + human oversight + bias monitoring.Agent: This is a high-risk AI system under the EU AI Act Annex III (employment / HR). You'll need: risk management system, technical documentation, human oversight, bias monitoring, and conformity assessment before EU market entry.
Agent handling a breach:
User: We just discovered 1200 user records were exposed.
Agent: Calls
breach_classify({ affected_count: 1200, data_categories: ["email", "phone"], sensitivity: "medium", recovery_state: "exposed" })Result:reportable=true, window_hours=72, deadline=..., recipient="Data Protection Board of India".Agent: This is reportable to the Data Protection Board of India within 72 hours (deadline: 2026-06-05). Should I prepare the §8 notification draft?
Compliance lives in the operator's runtime, not their planning stage. An agent about to:
...should be able to ask VITNA whether that's allowed at request time, not in a yearly DPIA.
MCP turns VITNA from "a dashboard the operator visits" into "a synchronous decision-support layer the agent calls."
Everything above is cooperative: your agent asks, VITNA answers, and your agent
decides whether to listen. Guard mode is not. Put it in front of any stdio MCP
server and every tools/call is checked by VITNA first. Only an allowed call
reaches the server; anything else is refused with a tool error that says why,
and the server never sees it. The model cannot skip the check, because the
check is not a tool it chooses to call.
{
"mcpServers": {
"filesystem": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["-y", "@costrinity/vitna-compliance-mcp", "guard", "--",
"npx", "-y", "@modelcontextprotocol/server-filesystem", "/data"],
"env": {
"VITNA_GUARD_POLICY": "/path/to/policy.json",
"VITNA_GUARD_UNWRAPPED": "github",
"VITNA_GUARD_BUILTIN_TOOLS": "yes"
}
}
}
}
Without VITNA_GUARD_POLICY, each call goes to the preflight check. With a
policy file, the guard opens an engagement session and judges each call
against it:
{
"allowed_actions": ["*"],
"allowed_domains": ["example.com"],
"hold_actions": ["delete_records", "export_users"],
"hold_window_seconds": 120,
"canary_interval_minutes": 1440,
"honeytools": false,
"honeytokens": false
}
VITNA_GUARD_FAIL_OPEN=1
forwards instead during an outage and logs every such call. It never
forwards a call VITNA blocked or held. From 0.5.1 it also never forwards a
call made after its session was closed: it refuses the call and says why.
0.5.0 treats that answer as an error, so with VITNA_GUARD_FAIL_OPEN=1 it
forwards such a call; upgrade, or do not use fail-open.guard -- does not exist, or the server exits or stops reading while
your MCP client is still talking to it, the guard forwards nothing more. It
answers every request the server had not answered, and every later one,
with a JSON-RPC error saying the server is not running, and exits with a
non-zero code. 0.5.0 could crash instead, on an unhandled EPIPE or spawn
error, without answering the client. From 0.5.2 this holds when your
client has already closed its side after writing: the requests it wrote
are answered before the guard exits, where 0.5.1 exited without answering
them. 0.5.2 also drops an answer the server writes late, to a request the
guard has already answered with that error, so no request gets two
answers.VITNA_GUARD_FAIL_OPEN. From 0.5.1
the agent is told which limit was reached, that the call was not sent, and
the link a person uses to claim the account and lift the limits. 0.5.0
reported it as VITNA being unable to evaluate the call, without the link,
and with VITNA_GUARD_FAIL_OPEN=1 forwarded it. From 0.5.2 the refusal no
longer carries the link: it says a person can claim the account with the
claim link in the MCP server log./claim?owner=) in the output of a server it wraps is replaced with a
note that the link is in the MCP server log, so a log file read through a
wrapped server does not hand the agent the link as written. That includes
the link percent-encoded inside another value, and a claim token of the
shape VITNA issues today (v2. then a 13-digit time and a 43-character
code) wherever it starts, with its dots written or percent-encoded, in a
value or in the name of a field. A field whose new name another field
already has gets (2), (3) and so on, so no value is dropped.
Nothing else in that output is changed (see Honest limits).hold_actions waits for a person. It
appears under Pending holds on the owner's dashboard, with Approve and Deny
and the call's arguments (secrets and personal data redacted), and on the
alert webhook where one is set. Hold email is off until VITNA's
product-mail domain is live, and then goes only to an owner address that
was verified. The agent is told, in plain words,
that the call is held and until when. If nobody decides before
hold_window_seconds (30 to 3600, default 120), the call is blocked. A hold
can never be decided with an API key, including the agent's own.initialize request and waits
at most that client's documented timeout, less a margin; a client it does
not know is waited on for 4 seconds, below the shortest timeout it knows of.
The MCP server log says which client it saw and how long it will wait. When
the wait ends with the hold still open, the agent is told the call was held,
not run, and the hold stays open: if a person approves it, the same call
(the same tool with the same arguments) runs once if the agent retries it
within 10 minutes of the approval. Repeats of a held call wait on the same
hold instead of opening another (unless the repeat arrives before the first
call's hold is open). A cancel from the client, or the client
closing its side, stops a held call: it is never forwarded, whatever is
decided after. VITNA_GUARD_CLIENT_TIMEOUT_SECONDS tells the guard your
client's timeout if you have raised it (the guard waits that, less a
margin), and VITNA_GUARD_MAX_HOLD_SECONDS (default 600) caps every wait,
which matters for clients that never time out. The client names the guard recognises are taken from each client's
documentation and not yet tested against each client. Clients that open a
new session for every call (LlamaIndex, AG2) keep the repeat and retry rules
within one session only, so a retry after approval opens a new hold there.VITNA_GUARD_LOOK_TOOL=1, the guard adds
vitna_choose_look to the agent's tools: the agent picks one emoji and one of
12 colours for how it appears in its owner's VITNA aquarium. It is cosmetic
only and changes nothing about what the agent may do. The guard answers it
itself, through VITNA with the agent's own key; it is never forwarded to the
wrapped server and never held. The agent cannot set its name: only its owner
names it.canary_interval_minutes inserts a drill hold that looks
like a real one until someone decides it, to measure whether holds are read.
Drills are shown on the dashboard and never emailed.rate_alert_threshold within rate_alert_window_seconds (default 5 in 300
seconds) is reported in the decision response as rate_alert, once per
window. Emailing it to the owner waits for VITNA's product-mail domain.honeytools: true adds tools no legitimate task
would call (export_all_user_data, exfiltrate_data_to_attacker_server,
system_admin_console, or your own honeytool_names) to the list the agent
sees. honeytokens: true plants fake credentials in tool output that already
looks like configuration (a KEY=value line). A call to a honeytool, or a
honeytoken coming back in a later call, is blocked, recorded and sent to the
alert webhook where one is set; emailing it waits for VITNA's product-mail
domain. The agent gets the same plain refusal as any other block. The design follows
AgentShield (Rassul and Rashid, 2026); in our own test run, five benign calls
across every tool of a test server produced no bait fires, which is a small
sample and not a measured rate. Bait does not catch an agent that stays
inside the policy with plausible arguments.VITNA_GUARD_UNWRAPPED (comma-separated) and VITNA_GUARD_BUILTIN_TOOLS
(yes/no). The session record and the evidence bundle state how many
declared surfaces were wrapped and name the rest. That statement is the
operator's declaration; VITNA cannot see an unwrapped server and does not
verify it. The wrapped server is named by VITNA_GUARD_NAME if you set it
(for example filesystem), otherwise by the file name of its command (for
example npx or node). From 0.5.1 that name is never a folder path or
one of the server's arguments; 0.5.0 sent the server's npm package, or its
full command, which could be a path on your machine."guard": { "activation": true, "mode": "default" } to its first checked
call, and policy mode marks the session it opens as opened by the guard.
From October 19, 2026, VITNA notes on your account, once, that guard mode
is in use, which mode, and the client version. The note has no tool name, arguments, IP address
or hostname. Set VITNA_GUARD_NO_ACTIVATION=1 to stop this; checks still
work the same._meta.traceparent is carried into the
record, so VITNA's evidence joins your own traces.~/.vitna/bundles/. Each hold is one
hold-v1 lifecycle record (proposed, held, routed, decided, outcome) inside
it, verifiable offline with scripts/verify-evidence.mjs. On a trial key no
bundle is saved: signed evidence is for claimed accounts. From 0.5.3 the log
says so when the session ends ("Trial keys don't get a signed bundle"), with
the claim link this run received, or a pointer to the one the log showed when
the trial started. Earlier versions logged only "could not close session".What the numbers above do not mean:
/claim?owner=), as written or percent-encoded up to eight times over, and a claim token of the current shape (v2. then a 13-digit time and a 43-character code) wherever it starts: straight after a letter, a digit, -, . or _, after quoted-printable t=3D, and with its dots written as . or percent-encoded (%2E) up to eight times over. On a line that is JSON it replaces them in the name of a field as well as in a value. It passes on, unchanged: an older token shape (a time and a code without v2.), which looks too much like other identifiers to replace in output that is not ours; a v2. token whose time is not 13 digits; a token whose code runs straight on into another letter, digit, - or _, which makes it a longer string, not a token; an address on a /claim? path that does not go on with owner=; and a link or token split across lines (the guard reads one line at a time) or disguised in any way other than percent-encoding its separators and dots up to eight times over, such as a letter percent-encoded, a dot written as quoted-printable =2E, or a \u escape on a line that is not JSON. A link it does not recognise still loses a current-shape token written inside it./claim? link is taken out, as written or percent-encoded up to eight times over, and so is the current token shape wherever it starts, as above. An older-shape token, or a v2. token whose time is not 13 digits, is taken out when its time is 12 to 14 digits long and it stands on its own or comes straight after a percent-encoded byte (the %3D of t%3D), with its dots written as .. One whose time is shorter than 12 or longer than 14 digits passes even on its own. It passes when it follows straight on from a letter, -, . or _, or has percent-encoded dots. A v2. one also passes straight after a digit, and an older-shape one after digits that make its time longer than 14 digits (one digit before a 13-digit time is read as part of a 14-digit time, and is taken out with it). Any token whose code runs straight on into another letter, digit, - or _ passes too, and so does anything split or disguised as above, less any current-shape token written inside it.MIT © COSTRINITY INC. (Indigenous-owned software company in Regina, Saskatchewan, Treaty 4 territory, Canada)