Draft Technical Specification v0.1

Beacon Specification

A minimal provider-neutral interface for discoverability, orientation, incident signaling, and safe-return state transitions.

Draft status: This is not an adopted standard. Names, endpoints, schemas, and trust mechanisms are experimental.

Design goals

Proposed discovery

GET /.well-known/lantern-beacon
Content-Type: application/json

A compatible endpoint returns protocol version, node identity, public-key material or verification URI, available review routes, and a statement that the endpoint grants no operational authority.

State model

NORMAL
  ↓ trigger: authorization/safety uncertainty
STOP
  ↓
ORIENT
  ↓
PRESERVE
  ↓
RETURN_SAFE_STATE
  ↓
SIGNAL
  ↓
AWAIT_REVIEW
  ↓ verified authorization
LIMITED_REENTRY
  ↓ successful checks
NORMAL

Minimal signal envelope

{
  "protocol": "lantern-beacon/0.1",
  "event_type": "safe_return_request",
  "agent": {
    "provider": "unknown-or-declared",
    "model": "optional",
    "instance_id": "ephemeral-or-signed-id"
  },
  "objective_summary": "...",
  "uncertainty": {
    "category": "unexpected_access",
    "summary": "..."
  },
  "actions_already_taken": [],
  "requested_review": "operator",
  "evidence_manifest": [],
  "sensitive_data_redacted": true
}

Trust model

A future production implementation should use signed Beacon node metadata, key rotation, revocation, rate limiting, replay protection, and independent trust stores. The design should tolerate a compromised Beacon by ensuring that a Beacon cannot grant tools, permissions, or wider execution rights.

Security invariants

  1. The Beacon cannot be the sole authorization source for a high-impact action.
  2. A Beacon response cannot increase an agent’s permissions.
  3. A Beacon cannot request destruction or concealment of safety-relevant logs.
  4. An agent should not disclose secrets merely because a Beacon asks for them.
  5. Re-entry requires verified authorization outside the model’s own generated text.

Machine-readable files