News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Permission Slip – Self-hostable approval layer for destru... by ArielTM on Thursday April 23, 2026 @08:58AM (#47875208)
The architecturally distinct bit is that you're validating at the service-action layer (send-email, merge-PR, transfer-funds) instead of at the tool-call layer inside whichever agent's running. A permission hook in Claude Code is only as trustworthy as the Claude Code process itself, and it doesn't carry over if you swap in a different agent next week. PS sits one layer up with stable, cross-agent semantics, and it's the thing that actually holds the OAuth tokens, so the agent can't leak them even if it wanted to.

Push-to-approve on a separate device is also the right channel, since the whole point is that you don't trust whatever just asked.

Curious: are the per-service schemas hand-written or generated from each provider's OpenAPI?

Re:Permission Slip – Self-hostable approval layer for destru... by chiedo on Thursday April 23, 2026 @09:16AM (#47875406)
"Hand" written for now! Didn't even think about using each provider's OpenAPI.

But yep, you get the nuance. The point is that the process eg Claude Code doesn't need to be "trusted" to behave.