frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Noobs can make SaaS motion videos – New tool

https://wevi.ai/
1•EvanLandau•21s ago•1 comments

Show HN: Brandlint – AI reviewer that catches off-brand copy in PRs

https://brandlint.com
1•tonychx•3m ago•0 comments

The Silent Killer of Math Ability – and the Cure

https://twitter.com/justinskycak/status/2015195345731441054
1•JustinSkycak•4m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Sqfty – Interactive Square Footage Visualizer and Calculator

https://sqfty.app/
1•Gigacore•6m ago•0 comments

The Economics of Dog Shows

https://thehustle.co/originals/the-economics-of-dog-shows
1•Anon84•7m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Dotfiles Coach CLI that analyzes your shell history with GitHub Copilot

https://github.com/OlaProeis/dotfiles-coach
1•OlaProis•11m ago•0 comments

"Bitcoin Is Dead" – The #1 Database of Notable Bitcoin Skeptics

https://bitbo.io/dead/
1•fsflover•12m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: OpenClaw vs. Claude Cowork – local skills vs. MCP integrations?

1•lazyxyz•12m ago•0 comments

Washington imposes 'terrorist-grade sanctions' on Francesca Albanese, ICC judges

https://thecradle.co/articles-id/35816
3•mindracer•13m ago•0 comments

How a Cat Debugged Stable Diffusion (2023)

https://blog.dwac.dev/posts/cat-debugging/
1•lukasgelbmann•13m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Curated collection of 70+ papers on computational morphology

https://github.com/akki2825/computational-morphology-lit
1•akkikek•15m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: How to get started with robotics as a hobbyist?

1•StefanBatory•17m ago•1 comments

You're Not Taking on Enough Tech Debt

https://singularitea.bearblog.dev/tech-debt/
2•raghavtoshniwal•19m ago•0 comments

Tauri

https://v2.tauri.app/
1•tosh•19m ago•0 comments

Transform human OR market sentiment into a probability distribution

https://www.skidetica.com/manifesto
1•tracyrage•20m ago•0 comments

The Anthropic Hive Mind

https://steve-yegge.medium.com/the-anthropic-hive-mind-d01f768f3d7b
2•ot•20m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Sediment – Local semantic memory for AI agents (Rust, single binary)

https://github.com/rendro/sediment
1•rendro•21m ago•0 comments

Exploiting signed bootloaders to circumvent UEFI Secure Boot

https://habr.com/en/articles/446238/
2•todsacerdoti•21m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Readability API – Unrender

https://unrender.page/
2•zintus•23m ago•1 comments

My Grandma Was a Fed – Lessons from Digitizing Hours of Childhood

https://sampatt.com/blog/2025-12-13-my-grandma-was-a-fed-lessons-from-digitizing-hundreds-of-hour...
2•SamPatt•29m ago•0 comments

Show HN: I built a free, open-source macOS screen recorder with modern features

https://github.com/jsattler/BetterCapture
1•jsattler•29m ago•0 comments

RFC 3092 – Etymology of "Foo" (2001)

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3092
11•ipnon•29m ago•1 comments

Prove_it – Force Claude to verify its work

https://github.com/searlsco/prove_it
2•mooreds•30m ago•0 comments

Benchmarking On-Device LLMs on iPhone and iPad Using MLX

https://rickytakkar.com/blog_russet_mlx_benchmark.html
2•nullnotzero•33m ago•0 comments

Matthew Perry and Jennifer Aniston Did an Advert for Windows 95 [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q1hDDtJAN8
1•megamike•37m ago•0 comments

We tested a transport app that cost the public £4M against Google Maps

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wx97jv7qeo
1•mmarian•39m ago•0 comments

Introduction to Abject-Oriented Programming (2007)

https://typicalprogrammer.com/introduction-to-abject-oriented-programming
2•simonpure•39m ago•0 comments

Boil the Ocean

https://garryslist.org/posts/boil-the-ocean
3•alexpogosyan•40m ago•0 comments

Show HN: I built an open-source Gmail productivity app that auto-labels emails

https://github.com/Lakshay1509/NeatMail
1•mafia15•42m ago•0 comments

AI fatigue Is real and nobody talks about it

https://siddhantkhare.com/writing/ai-fatigue-is-real
47•sidk24•42m ago•27 comments
Open in hackernews

Show HN: Circe – Deterministic, offline-verifiable receipts for AI agent actions

https://github.com/wv26296-ux/circe-receipts
2•W_rey45•2w ago
I’ve been working on a small primitive for agentic systems: a cryptographically signed receipt that records what an AI agent decided, what it did, and what changed — as a single canonical JSON artifact.

The problem: Agent systems today rely on logs, dashboards, or proprietary consoles for truth. Those are easy to forge, truncate, or lose. If an agent takes a high-stakes action (e.g. a firewall change, a deployment, a purchase), there’s no portable artifact you can independently verify later.

The idea: Treat agent execution like a signed transaction, not a log stream. Each run emits a receipt that can be verified offline, without trusting the issuer’s infrastructure.

How it works (minimal core):

Deterministic signing: Ed25519 signatures over a canonical JSON byte string

Canonicalization: RFC 8785-style JSON canonicalization (stable key ordering, UTF-8 encoding, no insignificant whitespace)

Tamper evidence: Any mutation of the signed payload flips the SHA-256 hash and invalidates the signature

Offline verification: A standalone verifier script; no network calls, no dependencies on the issuer

Try it locally (no network):

python verify_receipt.py hn_receipt.json python verify_receipt.py hn_receipt_tampered.json

The first passes; the second fails after a single-field mutation.

This is intentionally not a logging system, observability platform, or policy engine. It’s a small integrity / provenance primitive intended to compose with higher-level agent frameworks.

I’d appreciate feedback on:

Threat-model gaps (e.g. confused-deputy or context-hijacking risks)

Schema ergonomics for high-frequency or long-running agent pipelines

Canonicalization edge cases worth enforcing earlier

Comments

W_rey45•2w ago
Threat model / scope: This design assumes the signer’s private key is trusted at issuance time; it does not attempt to prove semantic correctness of the agent’s reasoning or inputs. The signature covers only the canonicalized signed_block; any mutation invalidates verification. Receipts are portable and verifiable offline but do not prevent a malicious issuer from signing false data (integrity primitive, not a truth oracle). Replay is detectable (e.g. via hash chaining or external indexing) but not prevented by the receipt alone. Confidentiality is out of scope; receipts are integrity-only artifacts. The goal is to make post-hoc tampering and log forgery detectable, not to replace policy enforcement or access control.
nulone•2w ago
Solid primitive. Two questions:

1. Crash edge case: If an agent executes a side-effect and dies before signing the receipt, is that action orphaned? Any WAL-style intent/completion model?

2. Multi-step workflows: Do receipts chain natively (parent pointers/Merkle) or via external linking? (I see storage/ledgers are out of scope, but curious about the linkage design.)

The negative proof angle (proving AI didn't touch prod) is compelling for compliance.

W_rey45•2w ago
Great questions.

1) Crash/orphan side-effect: agreed this needs an intent/commit model. The clean pattern is WAL-style: emit/sign an “INTENT” receipt before side-effect + a “COMMIT” receipt after; absence of COMMIT is itself evidence (“we can’t attest completion”). Another option is tool-level signing so the side-effecting tool returns a signed result that the agent includes.

2) Linking: yes linkage can be native without building storage. Next iteration is parent_hash (or prev_hash) inside the signed_block so receipts naturally chain; Merkle/log indexing stays external.

kxbnb•2w ago
The "signed transaction, not a log stream" framing is exactly right. Logs are optimistic - you assume they're complete and unmodified. Receipts are pessimistic - you verify before trusting.

We've been thinking about a related problem at toran.sh: capturing what an agent actually sent to external APIs (and what came back) without trusting the agent's self-reported logs. Different angle - we focus on the API request/response level rather than the decision/action level - but the same underlying insight: the source of truth needs to be outside the agent's control.

The Ed25519 + canonical JSON approach is clean. Question: how are you handling schema evolution? If the receipt format changes, older receipts still need to verify but newer tooling might expect different fields.

W_rey45•2w ago
Great question this is exactly the tension we’re trying to be explicit about.

CIRCE separates cryptographic verification from semantic interpretation. The signature covers a minimal, stable signed_block (canonicalized → hashed → signed). Everything else is metadata that can evolve without affecting verification.

Older receipts remain verifiable because the verifier only assumes the signed scope + canonicalization rules. Newer tooling can understand more fields, but must ignore unknown/missing fields (JWT / signed artifact style). We also include a schema identifier/hash for tooling selection, but it’s intentionally not security-critical — verification is purely about integrity.

Also: toran.sh’s angle is super aligned. Capturing actual API request/response outside the agent’s control feels like the “ground truth” complement to CIRCE’s “decision truth.” Curious: are you anchoring the API transcript via a sidecar/proxy with its own signing key, or are you doing something like a transparency log/Merkle chain for requests?