Why "The AI Hallucinated" is the perfect legal defense
8 days ago
- #Cryptographic Proof
- #Authorization Frameworks
- #AI Accountability
- The 'AI did it' defense is hard to refute due to lack of durable cryptographic proof binding human actions to AI outputs.
- Logs provide visibility but fail to answer key questions about authorization and delegation in disputes.
- Multi-agent systems complicate accountability as actions may span different domains without a verifiable chain of authorization.
- High-stakes systems treat authorization as a first-class artifact, requiring explicit steps and durable records.
- Checks exemplify authorization artifacts with designated negotiation and non-amplification properties.
- Tenuo Warrants provide cryptographic, scoped, time-bound authorization that is verifiable across multi-hop delegation.
- Warrants include issuer signature, holder binding, capability constraints, and delegation chain verification.
- Receipts pair authorization evidence with action metadata, providing proof beyond what logs can offer.
- Warrants limit blast radius from prompt injection by enforcing constraints and making authorization explicit.
- Compromised signing devices leave forensic evidence, unlike stolen OAuth tokens which are untraceable.
- Signatures, holder binding, and constraints provide accountability without relying on model trust.