Skip to content
Agent OS
AOS-LEGAL-010 Counsel-review engineering framework

Data Protection, Agent Processing, and Privacy Engineering

Data Protection, Agent Processing, and Privacy Engineering: scope, decisions, requirements, evidence, risks, and traceability for the Agent OS programme.

Edit on GitHub →

Data Protection, Agent Processing, and Privacy Engineering

This document is an engineering issue map for qualified counsel and compliance specialists; it is not legal advice or a substitute for jurisdiction-specific review.

Table of Contents

Purpose and Scope

Area: Legal and Compliance.

This document is an engineering issue map for qualified counsel and compliance specialists; it is not legal advice or a substitute for jurisdiction-specific review.

This document owns the semantics implied by Data Protection, Agent Processing, and Privacy Engineering. It does not assert that every described subsystem already exists. It defines the target model, constraints, evidence needed to trust an implementation, and the boundary with adjacent documents.

Normative Position

  1. Separate process identity, address space, execution context, scheduling context, and resource budget.
  2. Define deterministic failure for allocation, mapping, guard-page, copy, and invalid-access operations.
  3. Start with a measured SMP scheduler baseline before heterogeneous or distributed scheduling.

Operating Model

The operating model is contract-first and evidence-driven. A component declares its authority, resources, lifecycle, error model, cancellation and timeout behavior, observability, version, and compatibility promise. Backends are replaceable only when the same conformance suite passes and no forbidden platform type leaks into portable layers.

Implementation proceeds through a reference model or mock, deterministic QEMU evidence where relevant, documentation-first physical hardware, and quality-hardware evidence. Pixel 9 adapters remain quarantined according to ADR-0004.

Requirements

  • R01. Separate process identity, address space, execution context, scheduling context, and resource budget.
  • R02. Define deterministic failure for allocation, mapping, guard-page, copy, and invalid-access operations.
  • R03. Start with a measured SMP scheduler baseline before heterogeneous or distributed scheduling.
  • R04. Specify normal, partial, denied, timeout, cancellation, restart, upgrade, and permanent-failure behavior.
  • R05. Expose structured diagnostics without leaking secrets or vendor-specific implementation details.
  • R06. Link material unknowns to a claim and, when testable, an experiment with an owner and gate.
  • R07. Update affected documentation and task data when evidence changes the model.

Failure and Degradation

Degradation must be explicit rather than accidental. The system reports capability absence, reduced quality, unavailable provider, stale data, or unsafe condition through typed states. It must not silently fall back to broader authority, unrestricted legacy execution, unverified firmware, lossy data migration, or irreversible agent action.

Recovery defines what state is retained, reconstructed, re-enrolled, compensated, or intentionally discarded. Unsupported hardware or providers are rejected at binding time where possible.

Evidence and Acceptance

  • Isolation fault injection.
  • Scheduler trace corpus and latency distributions.
  • Memory-accounting invariants under pressure.
  • Evidence records target identity, hardware revision, firmware, source commit, toolchain, configuration, seed, timestamps, artifacts, expected result, actual result, and reviewer.
  • Acceptance requires the referenced tasks to meet their own criteria; prose completion is not implementation completion.

Implementation Obligations

Task Obligation Priority Gate/Milestone Verification
AOS-LEGAL-024 Map EU CRA, privacy, update, and vulnerability obligations P0 M1 Run the relevant document, schema, conformance, build, experiment, or hardware checks; independently review boundary compliance and acceptance criteria.

Risks and Open Questions

  • Unbounded kernel allocation and priority inheritance create denial-of-service paths.
  • DMA and shared-memory mappings can bypass process isolation.
  • Power-aware scheduling can conflict with latency guarantees.
  • Open-question rule: an unanswered high-impact question becomes a claim/experiment record and cannot be hidden in meeting notes.
  • Stop rule: work stops or changes track when legal rights, recovery, debug access, safety, or the required evidence path is unavailable.

Related Documents

Planning Reference Anchors

Review

AOS-LEGAL-024 — Map EU CRA, privacy, update, and vulnerability obligations