Hacktoberfest 2026: los issues que los mantenedores marcaron para octubre, abiertos y aptos para principiantes. Explorar issues de Hacktoberfest

[Feature] Content-level governance boundary — PII detection, prompt injection defense, and cost budgets for Bot tool arguments

Abierto
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#86 0 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Evaluación

Dificultad
5/5
Tiempo estimado
Más de una semana
Aptitud para principiantes
30/100
Tipo de issue
Nueva funcionalidad
Claridad
Bastante claro
Estado de actividad
Activo
Stack tecnológico
typescript
Área
backend-api-design, security

Línea de trabajo

Comienza localizando el pipeline de gateway del servidor descrito en el issue, especialmente el punto posterior a la evaluación de CEL y anterior a la llamada al ordenador, y revisa la interfaz existente del plugin de boundary. Compara los puntos de entrada propuestos para el plugin de gateway, el preset de boundary y el middleware del agente; el trabajo estará terminado cuando se hayan definido una ruta de integración decidida y su comportamiento de gobernanza del contenido, y ambos estén cubiertos por las pruebas adecuadas del proyecto.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Descripción

Problem

OpenBot's gateway handles infrastructure-level governance brilliantly — CEL policies on browser URLs, file paths, shell commands, and MCP tool classification. But there's a gap at the content level:

  1. PII in tool arguments — A Bot can pass an SSN, credit card number, or email to a tool without the gateway noticing, because CEL evaluates tool.name and page.url, not the argument content itself.

  2. Prompt injection via tool inputs — If a retrieved document or user message contains "ignore previous instructions...", that flows through the AG-UI endpoint into the Bot's tool arguments. The gateway sees a valid tool call to a permitted target — the adversarial content is invisible to CEL.

  3. Per-session cost budgets — The gateway records actions but doesn't enforce cumulative spend limits. A Bot can loop tool calls indefinitely without hitting a cost ceiling.

  4. Secret leakage in arguments — A Bot might pass api_key=sk-abc123... as a tool argument. The gateway correctly redacts secrets from the audit trail, but doesn't prevent the call from executing with the secret in-flight.

Proposed Solution

Add a content-level governance evaluator that runs alongside CEL, inspecting the content of tool arguments (not just tool names and targets). This would fire between "policy evaluated" and "call the computer" in the gateway pipeline.

One implementation: TealTiger — deterministic, in-process, no LLM in the evaluation path, <2ms per check. Already provides:

Check What It Catches
PII detection SSN, credit card, email, phone in tool args
Secret detection API keys, tokens, credentials
Prompt injection Instruction override, DAN, delimiter injection, system prompt override (8 patterns)
Cost budget Cumulative session spend with hard-stop
Argument validation SQL injection, path traversal in tool inputs

It could integrate as:

Option A — Gateway plugin:

// In the server gateway, after CEL evaluation, before calling computer
const contentDecision = await tealtigerEvaluate({
  toolName: resolvedTarget.tool,
  arguments: resolvedTarget.input,
  botId: bot.id,
  sessionCost: auditRow.cumulativeCost,
});
if (contentDecision.action === "DENY") {
  return refuse(contentDecision.reason);
}

Option B — Boundary preset:
A preset at /admin/boundaries that enables content-level checks:

# Content governance preset
name: "Content Protection"
rules:
  - scope: tool_arguments
    check: pii
    action: deny
    categories: [ssn, credit_card, email]
  - scope: tool_arguments
    check: prompt_injection
    action: deny
  - scope: session
    check: cost_budget
    action: deny
    max_usd: 5.00

Option C — Agent-level middleware:
The AG-UI agent (LangGraph, etc.) wraps itself with TealTiger middleware before registering as a Bot endpoint. Content governance happens inside the agent, infrastructure governance happens at the gateway. Defense-in-depth.

Use Cases
  • Financial services Bot handling account data — must not leak PII in tool arguments to third-party MCP servers
  • Research Bot consuming external documents — needs injection defense before those documents influence tool calls
  • Multi-Bot deployment with cost allocation — each Bot needs a per-session budget that hard-stops regardless of CEL rules
  • Compliance audit — need evidence that content-level checks were evaluated (not just that the URL/tool was permitted)
Why not just extend CEL?

CEL is great for structural checks (tool.name == "browser_navigate" && page.host != "internal.company.com"). But content scanning requires:

  • Regex pattern matching across variable-length text (PII/injection)
  • Stateful tracking (cumulative cost)
  • Confidence thresholds (injection detection isn't binary)

These are better served by a purpose-built content evaluator running alongside CEL rather than shoehorning them into CEL expressions.

Additional Context
  • TealTiger: https://github.com/agentguard-ai/tealtiger (Apache 2.0)
  • Already integrated with AG2 (built-in), Haystack, LangChain, CrewAI, Strands
  • NVIDIA Inception member
  • No external server required — runs in-process
  • Happy to contribute a PR once the boundary plugin interface stabilizes

This is complementary to existing governance, not a replacement. CEL handles infrastructure boundaries. Content evaluation handles what's inside the calls that pass those boundaries.

Lenguaje dominante
TypeScript
Estrellas
6.6k
Forks
914
Merge medio
17 h 52 min
PR fusionados (30 d)
155

Preparar el entorno

  • Incluye un Dockerfile o un archivo de Docker Compose
  • Tiene una plantilla de pull request
  • Sin guía de contribución

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de CopilotKit/OpenBot

Todos los issues de CopilotKit/OpenBot

Issues similares

Más issues de TypeScript

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.