Files
ietf-wimse-ect/draft-nennemann-wimse-execution-context-00.html
2026-02-24 18:54:21 +01:00

4697 lines
227 KiB
HTML
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters
This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en" class="Internet-Draft">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<meta content="Common,Latin" name="scripts">
<meta content="initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport">
<title>Execution Context Tokens for Distributed Agentic Workflows</title>
<meta content="Christian Nennemann" name="author">
<meta content="
This document defines Execution Context Tokens (ECTs), an extension
to the Workload Identity in Multi System Environments (WIMSE)
architecture for distributed agentic workflows in regulated
environments. ECTs provide cryptographic proof of task execution
order, policy enforcement decisions, and compliance state across
agent-to-agent communication. By extending WIMSE Workload Identity
Tokens with execution context claims in JSON Web Token (JWT)
format, this specification enables regulated systems to maintain
structured audit trails that support compliance verification.
ECTs use a directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure to represent task
dependencies, record policy evaluation outcomes at each decision
point, and integrate with WIMSE Workload Identity Tokens (WIT) and
Workload Proof Tokens (WPT) using the same signing model and
cryptographic primitives. A new HTTP header field,
Execution-Context, is defined for transporting ECTs alongside
existing WIMSE headers. ECTs are a technical building block that
supports, but does not by itself constitute, compliance with
regulatory frameworks.
" name="description">
<meta content="xml2rfc 3.31.0" name="generator">
<meta content="execution context" name="keyword">
<meta content="workload identity" name="keyword">
<meta content="agentic workflows" name="keyword">
<meta content="audit trail" name="keyword">
<meta content="compliance" name="keyword">
<meta content="regulated systems" name="keyword">
<meta content="draft-nennemann-wimse-execution-context-00" name="ietf.draft">
<!-- Generator version information:
xml2rfc 3.31.0
Python 3.9.6
ConfigArgParse 1.7.1
google-i18n-address 3.1.1
intervaltree 3.2.1
Jinja2 3.1.6
lxml 6.0.2
platformdirs 4.4.0
pycountry 24.6.1
PyYAML 6.0.3
requests 2.32.5
wcwidth 0.6.0
-->
<link href="draft-nennemann-wimse-execution-context-00.xml" rel="alternate" type="application/rfc+xml">
<link href="#copyright" rel="license">
<style type="text/css">/*
NOTE: Changes at the bottom of this file overrides some earlier settings.
Once the style has stabilized and has been adopted as an official RFC style,
this can be consolidated so that style settings occur only in one place, but
for now the contents of this file consists first of the initial CSS work as
provided to the RFC Formatter (xml2rfc) work, followed by itemized and
commented changes found necessary during the development of the v3
formatters.
*/
/* fonts */
@import url('https://static.ietf.org/fonts/noto-sans/import.css'); /* Sans-serif */
@import url('https://static.ietf.org/fonts/noto-serif/import.css'); /* Serif (print) */
@import url('https://static.ietf.org/fonts/roboto-mono/import.css'); /* Monospace */
:root {
--font-sans: 'Noto Sans', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
--font-serif: 'Noto Serif', 'Times', 'Times New Roman', serif;
--font-mono: 'Roboto Mono', Courier, 'Courier New', monospace;
}
@viewport {
zoom: 1.0;
}
@-ms-viewport {
width: extend-to-zoom;
zoom: 1.0;
}
/* general and mobile first */
html {
}
body {
max-width: 90%;
margin: 1.5em auto;
color: #222;
background-color: #fff;
font-size: 14px;
font-family: var(--font-sans);
line-height: 1.6;
scroll-behavior: smooth;
overflow-wrap: break-word;
}
.ears {
display: none;
}
/* headings */
#title, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
margin: 1em 0 0.5em;
font-weight: bold;
line-height: 1.3;
}
#title {
clear: both;
border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
margin: 0 0 0.5em 0;
padding: 1em 0 0.5em;
}
.author {
padding-bottom: 4px;
}
h1 {
font-size: 26px;
margin: 1em 0;
}
h2 {
font-size: 22px;
margin-top: -20px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 33px;
}
h3 {
font-size: 18px;
margin-top: -36px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 42px;
}
h4 {
font-size: 16px;
margin-top: -36px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 42px;
}
h5, h6 {
font-size: 14px;
}
#n-copyright-notice {
border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
padding-bottom: 1em;
margin-bottom: 1em;
}
/* general structure */
p {
padding: 0;
margin: 0 0 1em 0;
text-align: left;
}
div, span {
position: relative;
}
div {
margin: 0;
}
.alignRight.art-text {
background-color: #f9f9f9;
border: 1px solid #eee;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 1em 1em 0;
margin-bottom: 1.5em;
}
.alignRight.art-text pre {
padding: 0;
}
.alignRight {
margin: 1em 0;
}
.alignRight > *:first-child {
border: none;
margin: 0;
float: right;
clear: both;
}
.alignRight > *:nth-child(2) {
clear: both;
display: block;
border: none;
}
svg {
display: block;
}
@media print {
svg {
max-height: 850px;
max-width: 660px;
}
}
svg[font-family~="serif" i], svg [font-family~="serif" i] {
font-family: var(--font-serif);
}
svg[font-family~="sans-serif" i], svg [font-family~="sans-serif" i] {
font-family: var(--font-sans);
}
svg[font-family~="monospace" i], svg [font-family~="monospace" i] {
font-family: var(--font-mono);
}
.alignCenter.art-text {
background-color: #f9f9f9;
border: 1px solid #eee;
border-radius: 3px;
padding: 1em 1em 0;
margin-bottom: 1.5em;
}
.alignCenter.art-text pre {
padding: 0;
}
.alignCenter {
margin: 1em 0;
}
.alignCenter > *:first-child {
display: table;
border: none;
margin: 0 auto;
}
/* lists */
ol, ul {
padding: 0;
margin: 0 0 1em 2em;
}
ol ol, ul ul, ol ul, ul ol {
margin-left: 1em;
}
li {
margin: 0 0 0.25em 0;
}
.ulCompact li {
margin: 0;
}
ul.empty, .ulEmpty {
list-style-type: none;
}
ul.empty li, .ulEmpty li {
margin-top: 0.5em;
}
ul.ulBare, li.ulBare {
margin-left: 0em !important;
}
ul.compact, .ulCompact,
ol.compact, .olCompact {
line-height: 100%;
margin: 0 0 0 2em;
}
/* definition lists */
dl {
}
dl > dt {
float: left;
margin-right: 1em;
}
/*
dl.nohang > dt {
float: none;
}
*/
dl > dd {
margin-bottom: .8em;
min-height: 1.3em;
}
dl.compact > dd, .dlCompact > dd {
margin-bottom: 0em;
}
dl > dd > dl {
margin-top: 0.5em;
margin-bottom: 0em;
}
/* links */
a {
text-decoration: none;
}
a[href] {
color: #22e; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
}
a[href]:hover {
background-color: #f2f2f2;
}
figcaption a[href],
a[href].selfRef {
color: #222;
}
/* XXX probably not this:
a.selfRef:hover {
background-color: transparent;
cursor: default;
} */
/* Figures */
tt, code, pre {
background-color: #f9f9f9;
font-family: var(--font-mono);
}
pre {
border: 1px solid #eee;
margin: 0;
padding: 1em;
}
img {
max-width: 100%;
}
figure {
margin: 0;
}
figure blockquote {
margin: 0.8em 0.4em 0.4em;
}
figcaption {
font-style: italic;
margin: 0 0 1em 0;
}
@media screen {
pre {
overflow-x: auto;
max-width: 100%;
max-width: calc(100% - 22px);
}
}
/* aside, blockquote */
aside, blockquote {
margin-left: 0;
padding: 1.2em 2em;
}
blockquote {
background-color: #f9f9f9;
color: #111; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
border: 1px solid #ddd;
border-radius: 3px;
margin: 1em 0;
}
blockquote > *:last-child {
margin-bottom: 0;
}
cite {
display: block;
text-align: right;
font-style: italic;
}
.xref {
overflow-wrap: normal;
}
/* tables */
table {
width: 100%;
margin: 0 0 1em;
border-collapse: collapse;
border: 1px solid #eee;
}
th, td {
text-align: left;
vertical-align: top;
padding: 0.5em 0.75em;
}
th {
text-align: left;
background-color: #e9e9e9;
}
tr:nth-child(2n+1) > td {
background-color: #f5f5f5;
}
table caption {
font-style: italic;
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
text-align: left;
}
table p {
/* XXX to avoid bottom margin on table row signifiers. If paragraphs should
be allowed within tables more generally, it would be far better to select on a class. */
margin: 0;
}
/* pilcrow */
a.pilcrow {
color: #666; /* Arlen: AHDJ 2019 */
text-decoration: none;
visibility: hidden;
user-select: none;
-ms-user-select: none;
-o-user-select:none;
-moz-user-select: none;
-khtml-user-select: none;
-webkit-user-select: none;
-webkit-touch-callout: none;
}
@media screen {
aside:hover > a.pilcrow,
p:hover > a.pilcrow,
blockquote:hover > a.pilcrow,
div:hover > a.pilcrow,
li:hover > a.pilcrow,
pre:hover > a.pilcrow {
visibility: visible;
}
a.pilcrow:hover {
background-color: transparent;
}
}
/* misc */
hr {
border: 0;
border-top: 1px solid #eee;
}
.bcp14 {
font-variant: small-caps;
}
.role {
font-variant: all-small-caps;
}
/* info block */
#identifiers {
margin: 0;
font-size: 0.9em;
}
#identifiers dt {
width: 3em;
clear: left;
}
#identifiers dd {
float: left;
margin-bottom: 0;
}
/* Fix PDF info block run off issue */
@media print {
#identifiers dd {
max-width: 100%;
}
}
#identifiers .authors .author {
display: inline-block;
margin-right: 1.5em;
}
#identifiers .authors .org {
font-style: italic;
}
/* The prepared/rendered info at the very bottom of the page */
.docInfo {
color: #666; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
font-size: 0.9em;
font-style: italic;
margin-top: 2em;
}
.docInfo .prepared {
float: left;
}
.docInfo .prepared {
float: right;
}
/* table of contents */
#toc {
padding: 0.75em 0 2em 0;
margin-bottom: 1em;
}
nav.toc ul {
margin: 0 0.5em 0 0;
padding: 0;
list-style: none;
}
nav.toc li {
line-height: 1.3em;
margin: 0.75em 0;
padding-left: 1.2em;
text-indent: -1.2em;
}
/* references */
.references dt {
text-align: right;
font-weight: bold;
min-width: 7em;
}
.references dd {
margin-left: 8em;
overflow: auto;
}
.refInstance {
margin-bottom: 1.25em;
}
.refSubseries {
margin-bottom: 1.25em;
}
.references .ascii {
margin-bottom: 0.25em;
}
/* index */
.index ul {
margin: 0 0 0 1em;
padding: 0;
list-style: none;
}
.index ul ul {
margin: 0;
}
.index li {
margin: 0;
text-indent: -2em;
padding-left: 2em;
padding-bottom: 5px;
}
.indexIndex {
margin: 0.5em 0 1em;
}
.index a {
font-weight: 700;
}
/* make the index two-column on all but the smallest screens */
@media (min-width: 600px) {
.index ul {
-moz-column-count: 2;
-moz-column-gap: 20px;
}
.index ul ul {
-moz-column-count: 1;
-moz-column-gap: 0;
}
}
/* authors */
address.vcard {
font-style: normal;
margin: 1em 0;
}
address.vcard .nameRole {
font-weight: 700;
margin-left: 0;
}
address.vcard .label {
font-family: var(--font-sans);
margin: 0.5em 0;
}
address.vcard .type {
display: none;
}
.alternative-contact {
margin: 1.5em 0 1em;
}
hr.addr {
border-top: 1px dashed;
margin: 0;
color: #ddd;
max-width: calc(100% - 16px);
}
/* temporary notes */
.rfcEditorRemove::before {
position: absolute;
top: 0.2em;
right: 0.2em;
padding: 0.2em;
content: "The RFC Editor will remove this note";
color: #9e2a00; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
}
.rfcEditorRemove {
position: relative;
padding-top: 1.8em;
background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
border-radius: 3px;
}
.cref {
background-color: #ffd; /* Arlen: WCAG 2019 */
padding: 2px 4px;
}
.crefSource {
font-style: italic;
}
/* alternative layout for smaller screens */
@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
body {
padding-top: 2em;
}
#title {
padding: 1em 0;
}
h1 {
font-size: 24px;
}
h2 {
font-size: 20px;
margin-top: -18px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 38px;
}
#identifiers dd {
max-width: 60%;
}
#toc {
position: fixed;
z-index: 2;
top: 0;
right: 0;
padding: 0;
margin: 0;
background-color: inherit;
border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc;
}
#toc h2 {
margin: -1px 0 0 0;
padding: 4px 0 4px 6px;
padding-right: 1em;
min-width: 190px;
font-size: 1.1em;
text-align: right;
background-color: #444;
color: white;
cursor: pointer;
}
#toc h2::before { /* css hamburger */
float: right;
position: relative;
width: 1em;
height: 1px;
left: -164px;
margin: 6px 0 0 0;
background: white none repeat scroll 0 0;
box-shadow: 0 4px 0 0 white, 0 8px 0 0 white;
content: "";
}
#toc nav {
display: none;
padding: 0.5em 1em 1em;
overflow: auto;
height: calc(100vh - 48px);
border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
}
}
/* alternative layout for wide screens */
@media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
body {
max-width: 724px;
margin: 42px auto;
padding-left: 1.5em;
padding-right: 29em;
}
#toc {
position: fixed;
top: 42px;
right: 42px;
width: 25%;
margin: 0;
padding: 0 1em;
z-index: 1;
}
#toc h2 {
border-top: none;
border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd;
font-size: 1em;
font-weight: normal;
margin: 0;
padding: 0.25em 1em 1em 0;
}
#toc nav {
display: block;
height: calc(90vh - 84px);
bottom: 0;
padding: 0.5em 0 0;
overflow: auto;
}
img { /* future proofing */
max-width: 100%;
height: auto;
}
}
/* pagination */
@media print {
body {
width: 100%;
}
p {
orphans: 3;
widows: 3;
}
#n-copyright-notice {
border-bottom: none;
}
#toc, #n-introduction {
page-break-before: always;
}
#toc {
border-top: none;
padding-top: 0;
}
figure, pre {
page-break-inside: avoid;
}
figure {
overflow: scroll;
}
.breakable pre {
break-inside: auto;
}
h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 {
page-break-after: avoid;
}
h2+*, h3+*, h4+*, h5+*, h6+* {
page-break-before: avoid;
}
pre {
white-space: pre-wrap;
word-wrap: break-word;
font-size: 10pt;
}
table {
border: 1px solid #ddd;
}
td {
border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
}
}
/* This is commented out here, as the string-set: doesn't
pass W3C validation currently */
/*
.ears thead .left {
string-set: ears-top-left content();
}
.ears thead .center {
string-set: ears-top-center content();
}
.ears thead .right {
string-set: ears-top-right content();
}
.ears tfoot .left {
string-set: ears-bottom-left content();
}
.ears tfoot .center {
string-set: ears-bottom-center content();
}
.ears tfoot .right {
string-set: ears-bottom-right content();
}
*/
@page :first {
padding-top: 0;
@top-left {
content: normal;
border: none;
}
@top-center {
content: normal;
border: none;
}
@top-right {
content: normal;
border: none;
}
}
@page {
size: A4;
margin-bottom: 45mm;
padding-top: 20px;
/* The following is commented out here, but set appropriately by in code, as
the content depends on the document */
/*
@top-left {
content: 'Internet-Draft';
vertical-align: bottom;
border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
}
@top-left {
content: string(ears-top-left);
vertical-align: bottom;
border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
}
@top-center {
content: string(ears-top-center);
vertical-align: bottom;
border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
}
@top-right {
content: string(ears-top-right);
vertical-align: bottom;
border-bottom: solid 1px #ccc;
}
@bottom-left {
content: string(ears-bottom-left);
vertical-align: top;
border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
}
@bottom-center {
content: string(ears-bottom-center);
vertical-align: top;
border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
}
@bottom-right {
content: '[Page ' counter(page) ']';
vertical-align: top;
border-top: solid 1px #ccc;
}
*/
}
/* Changes introduced to fix issues found during implementation */
/* Make sure links are clickable even if overlapped by following H* */
a {
z-index: 2;
}
/* Separate body from document info even without intervening H1 */
section {
clear: both;
}
/* Top align author divs, to avoid names without organization dropping level with org names */
.author {
vertical-align: top;
}
/* Leave room in document info to show Internet-Draft on one line */
#identifiers dt {
width: 8em;
}
/* Don't waste quite as much whitespace between label and value in doc info */
#identifiers dd {
margin-left: 1em;
}
/* Give floating toc a background color (needed when it's a div inside section */
#toc {
background-color: white;
}
/* Make the collapsed ToC header render white on gray also when it's a link */
@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
#toc h2 a,
#toc h2 a:link,
#toc h2 a:focus,
#toc h2 a:hover,
#toc a.toplink,
#toc a.toplink:hover {
color: white;
background-color: #444;
text-decoration: none;
}
}
/* Give the bottom of the ToC some whitespace */
@media screen and (min-width: 1024px) {
#toc {
padding: 0 0 1em 1em;
}
}
/* Style section numbers with more space between number and title */
.section-number {
padding-right: 0.5em;
}
/* prevent monospace from becoming overly large */
tt, code, pre {
font-size: 95%;
}
/* Fix the height/width aspect for ascii art*/
.sourcecode pre,
.art-text pre {
line-height: 1.12;
}
/* Add styling for a link in the ToC that points to the top of the document */
a.toplink {
float: right;
margin-right: 0.5em;
}
/* Fix the dl styling to match the RFC 7992 attributes */
dl > dt,
dl.dlParallel > dt {
float: left;
margin-right: 1em;
}
dl.dlNewline > dt {
float: none;
}
/* Provide styling for table cell text alignment */
table td.text-left,
table th.text-left {
text-align: left;
}
table td.text-center,
table th.text-center {
text-align: center;
}
table td.text-right,
table th.text-right {
text-align: right;
}
/* Make the alternative author contact information look less like just another
author, and group it closer with the primary author contact information */
.alternative-contact {
margin: 0.5em 0 0.25em 0;
}
address .non-ascii {
margin: 0 0 0 2em;
}
/* With it being possible to set tables with alignment
left, center, and right, { width: 100%; } does not make sense */
table {
width: auto;
}
/* Avoid reference text that sits in a block with very wide left margin,
because of a long floating dt label.*/
.references dd {
overflow: visible;
}
/* Control caption placement */
caption {
caption-side: bottom;
}
/* Limit the width of the author address vcard, so names in right-to-left
script don't end up on the other side of the page. */
address.vcard {
max-width: 30em;
margin-right: auto;
}
/* For address alignment dependent on LTR or RTL scripts */
address div.left {
text-align: left;
}
address div.right {
text-align: right;
}
/* Provide table alignment support. We can't use the alignX classes above
since they do unwanted things with caption and other styling. */
table.right {
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: 0;
}
table.center {
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
}
table.left {
margin-left: 0;
margin-right: auto;
}
/* Give the table caption label the same styling as the figcaption */
caption a[href] {
color: #222;
}
@media print {
.toplink {
display: none;
}
/* avoid overwriting the top border line with the ToC header */
#toc {
padding-top: 1px;
}
/* Avoid page breaks inside dl and author address entries */
.vcard {
page-break-inside: avoid;
}
}
/* Tweak the bcp14 keyword presentation */
.bcp14 {
font-variant: small-caps;
font-weight: bold;
font-size: 0.9em;
}
/* Tweak the invisible space above H* in order not to overlay links in text above */
h2 {
margin-top: -18px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 31px;
}
h3 {
margin-top: -18px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 24px;
}
h4 {
margin-top: -18px; /* provide offset for in-page anchors */
padding-top: 24px;
}
/* Float artwork pilcrow to the right */
@media screen {
.artwork a.pilcrow {
display: block;
line-height: 0.7;
margin-top: 0.15em;
}
}
/* Make pilcrows on dd visible */
@media screen {
dd:hover > a.pilcrow {
visibility: visible;
}
}
/* Make the placement of figcaption match that of a table's caption
by removing the figure's added bottom margin */
.alignLeft.art-text,
.alignCenter.art-text,
.alignRight.art-text {
margin-bottom: 0;
}
.alignLeft,
.alignCenter,
.alignRight {
margin: 1em 0 0 0;
}
/* In print, the pilcrow won't show on hover, so prevent it from taking up space,
possibly even requiring a new line */
@media print {
a.pilcrow {
display: none;
}
}
/* Styling for the external metadata */
div#external-metadata {
background-color: #eee;
padding: 0.5em;
margin-bottom: 0.5em;
display: none;
}
div#internal-metadata {
padding: 0.5em; /* to match the external-metadata padding */
}
/* Styling for title RFC Number */
h1#rfcnum {
clear: both;
margin: 0 0 -1em;
padding: 1em 0 0 0;
}
/* Make .olPercent look the same as <ol><li> */
dl.olPercent > dd {
margin-bottom: 0.25em;
min-height: initial;
}
/* Give aside some styling to set it apart */
aside {
border-left: 1px solid #ddd;
margin: 1em 0 1em 2em;
padding: 0.2em 2em;
}
aside > dl,
aside > ol,
aside > ul,
aside > table,
aside > p {
margin-bottom: 0.5em;
}
/* Additional page break settings */
@media print {
figcaption, table caption {
page-break-before: avoid;
}
}
/* Font size adjustments for print */
@media print {
body { font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; max-width: 96%; }
h1 { font-size: 1.72em; padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2*1.2*1.2 */
h2 { font-size: 1.44em; padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2*1.2 */
h3 { font-size: 1.2em; padding-top: 1.5em; } /* 1*1.2 */
h4 { font-size: 1em; padding-top: 1.5em; }
h5, h6 { font-size: 1em; margin: initial; padding: 0.5em 0 0.3em; }
}
/* Sourcecode margin in print, when there's no pilcrow */
@media print {
.artwork,
.artwork > pre,
.sourcecode {
margin-bottom: 1em;
}
}
/* Avoid narrow tables forcing too narrow table captions, which may render badly */
table {
min-width: 20em;
}
/* ol type a */
ol.type-a { list-style-type: lower-alpha; }
ol.type-A { list-style-type: upper-alpha; }
ol.type-i { list-style-type: lower-roman; }
ol.type-I { list-style-type: upper-roman; }
/* Apply the print table and row borders in general, on request from the RPC,
and increase the contrast between border and odd row background slightly */
table {
border: 1px solid #ddd;
}
td {
border-top: 1px solid #ddd;
}
tr {
break-inside: avoid;
}
tr:nth-child(2n+1) > td {
background-color: #f8f8f8;
}
/* Use style rules to govern display of the TOC. */
@media screen and (max-width: 1023px) {
#toc nav { display: none; }
#toc.active nav { display: block; }
}
/* Add support for keepWithNext */
.keepWithNext {
break-after: avoid-page;
break-after: avoid-page;
}
/* Add support for keepWithPrevious */
.keepWithPrevious {
break-before: avoid-page;
}
/* Change the approach to avoiding breaks inside artwork etc. */
figure, pre, table, .artwork, .sourcecode {
break-before: auto;
break-after: auto;
}
/* Avoid breaks between <dt> and <dd> */
dl {
break-before: auto;
break-inside: auto;
}
dt {
break-before: auto;
break-after: avoid-page;
}
dd {
break-before: avoid-page;
break-after: auto;
orphans: 3;
widows: 3
}
span.break, dd.break {
margin-bottom: 0;
min-height: 0;
break-before: auto;
break-inside: auto;
break-after: auto;
}
/* Undo break-before ToC */
@media print {
#toc {
break-before: auto;
}
}
/* Text in compact lists should not get extra bottom margin space,
since that would makes the list not compact */
ul.compact p, .ulCompact p,
ol.compact p, .olCompact p {
margin: 0;
}
/* But the list as a whole needs the extra space at the end */
section ul.compact,
section .ulCompact,
section ol.compact,
section .olCompact {
margin-bottom: 1em; /* same as p not within ul.compact etc. */
}
/* The tt and code background above interferes with for instance table cell
backgrounds. Changed to something a bit more selective. */
tt, code {
background-color: transparent;
}
p tt, p code, li tt, li code, dt tt, dt code {
background-color: #f8f8f8;
}
/* Tweak the pre margin -- 0px doesn't come out well */
pre {
margin-top: 0.5px;
}
/* Tweak the compact list text */
ul.compact, .ulCompact,
ol.compact, .olCompact,
dl.compact, .dlCompact {
line-height: normal;
}
/* Don't add top margin for nested lists */
li > ul, li > ol, li > dl,
dd > ul, dd > ol, dd > dl,
dl > dd > dl {
margin-top: initial;
}
/* Elements that should not be rendered on the same line as a <dt> */
/* This should match the element list in writer.text.TextWriter.render_dl() */
dd > div.artwork:first-child,
dd > aside:first-child,
dd > blockquote:first-child,
dd > figure:first-child,
dd > ol:first-child,
dd > div.sourcecode:first-child,
dd > table:first-child,
dd > ul:first-child {
clear: left;
}
/* fix for weird browser behaviour when <dd/> is empty */
dt+dd:empty::before{
content: "\00a0";
}
/* Make paragraph spacing inside <li> smaller than in body text, to fit better within the list */
li > p {
margin-bottom: 0.5em
}
/* Don't let p margin spill out from inside list items */
li > p:last-of-type:only-child {
margin-bottom: 0;
}
</style>
<link href="rfc-local.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">
<script type="application/javascript">async function addMetadata(){try{const e=document.styleSheets[0].cssRules;for(let t=0;t<e.length;t++)if(/#identifiers/.exec(e[t].selectorText)){const a=e[t].cssText.replace("#identifiers","#external-updates");document.styleSheets[0].insertRule(a,document.styleSheets[0].cssRules.length)}}catch(e){console.log(e)}const e=document.getElementById("external-metadata");if(e)try{var t,a="",o=function(e){const t=document.getElementsByTagName("meta");for(let a=0;a<t.length;a++)if(t[a].getAttribute("name")===e)return t[a].getAttribute("content");return""}("rfc.number");if(o){t="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc"+o+".json";try{const e=await fetch(t);a=await e.json()}catch(e){t=document.URL.indexOf("html")>=0?document.URL.replace(/html$/,"json"):document.URL+".json";const o=await fetch(t);a=await o.json()}}if(!a)return;e.style.display="block";const s="",d="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc",n="https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search",c="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info",l=a.doc_id.toLowerCase(),i=a.doc_id.slice(0,3).toLowerCase(),f=a.doc_id.slice(3).replace(/^0+/,""),u={status:"Status",obsoletes:"Obsoletes",obsoleted_by:"Obsoleted By",updates:"Updates",updated_by:"Updated By",see_also:"See Also",errata_url:"Errata"};let h="<dl style='overflow:hidden' id='external-updates'>";["status","obsoletes","obsoleted_by","updates","updated_by","see_also","errata_url"].forEach(e=>{if("status"==e){a[e]=a[e].toLowerCase();var t=a[e].split(" "),o=t.length,w="",p=1;for(let e=0;e<o;e++)p<o?w=w+r(t[e])+" ":w+=r(t[e]),p++;a[e]=w}else if("obsoletes"==e||"obsoleted_by"==e||"updates"==e||"updated_by"==e){var g,m="",b=1;g=a[e].length;for(let t=0;t<g;t++)a[e][t]&&(a[e][t]=String(a[e][t]).toLowerCase(),m=b<g?m+"<a href='"+s+"/rfc/".concat(a[e][t])+"'>"+a[e][t].slice(3)+"</a>, ":m+"<a href='"+s+"/rfc/".concat(a[e][t])+"'>"+a[e][t].slice(3)+"</a>",b++);a[e]=m}else if("see_also"==e){var y,L="",C=1;y=a[e].length;for(let t=0;t<y;t++)if(a[e][t]){a[e][t]=String(a[e][t]);var _=a[e][t].slice(0,3),v=a[e][t].slice(3).replace(/^0+/,"");L=C<y?"RFC"!=_?L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+_+" "+v+"</a>, ":L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+v+"</a>, ":"RFC"!=_?L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+_+" "+v+"</a>":L+"<a href='"+s+"/info/"+_.toLowerCase().concat(v.toLowerCase())+"'>"+v+"</a>",C++}a[e]=L}else if("errata_url"==e){var R="";R=a[e]?R+"<a href='"+a[e]+"'>Errata exist</a> | <a href='"+d+"/"+l+"'>Datatracker</a>| <a href='"+n+"/?"+i+"="+f+"&submit="+i+"'>IPR</a> | <a href='"+c+"/"+l+"'>Info page</a>":"<a href='"+d+"/"+l+"'>Datatracker</a> | <a href='"+n+"/?"+i+"="+f+"&submit="+i+"'>IPR</a> | <a href='"+c+"/"+l+"'>Info page</a>",a[e]=R}""!=a[e]?"Errata"==u[e]?h+=`<dt>More info:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`:h+=`<dt>${u[e]}:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`:"Errata"==u[e]&&(h+=`<dt>More info:</dt><dd>${a[e]}</dd>`)}),h+="</dl>",e.innerHTML=h}catch(e){console.log(e)}else console.log("Could not locate metadata <div> element");function r(e){return e.charAt(0).toUpperCase()+e.slice(1)}}window.removeEventListener("load",addMetadata),window.addEventListener("load",addMetadata);</script>
</head>
<body class="xml2rfc">
<table class="ears">
<thead><tr>
<td class="left">Internet-Draft</td>
<td class="center">WIMSE Execution Context</td>
<td class="right">February 2026</td>
</tr></thead>
<tfoot><tr>
<td class="left">Nennemann</td>
<td class="center">Expires 28 August 2026</td>
<td class="right">[Page]</td>
</tr></tfoot>
</table>
<div id="external-metadata" class="document-information"></div>
<div id="internal-metadata" class="document-information">
<dl id="identifiers">
<dt class="label-workgroup">Workgroup:</dt>
<dd class="workgroup">WIMSE</dd>
<dt class="label-internet-draft">Internet-Draft:</dt>
<dd class="internet-draft">draft-nennemann-wimse-execution-context-00</dd>
<dt class="label-published">Published:</dt>
<dd class="published">
<time datetime="2026-02-24" class="published">24 February 2026</time>
</dd>
<dt class="label-intended-status">Intended Status:</dt>
<dd class="intended-status">Standards Track</dd>
<dt class="label-expires">Expires:</dt>
<dd class="expires"><time datetime="2026-08-28">28 August 2026</time></dd>
<dt class="label-authors">Author:</dt>
<dd class="authors">
<div class="author">
<div class="author-name">C. Nennemann</div>
<div class="org">Independent Researcher</div>
</div>
</dd>
</dl>
</div>
<h1 id="title">Execution Context Tokens for Distributed Agentic Workflows</h1>
<section id="section-abstract">
<h2 id="abstract"><a href="#abstract" class="selfRef">Abstract</a></h2>
<p id="section-abstract-1">This document defines Execution Context Tokens (ECTs), an extension
to the Workload Identity in Multi System Environments (WIMSE)
architecture for distributed agentic workflows in regulated
environments. ECTs provide cryptographic proof of task execution
order, policy enforcement decisions, and compliance state across
agent-to-agent communication. By extending WIMSE Workload Identity
Tokens with execution context claims in JSON Web Token (JWT)
format, this specification enables regulated systems to maintain
structured audit trails that support compliance verification.
ECTs use a directed acyclic graph (DAG) structure to represent task
dependencies, record policy evaluation outcomes at each decision
point, and integrate with WIMSE Workload Identity Tokens (WIT) and
Workload Proof Tokens (WPT) using the same signing model and
cryptographic primitives. A new HTTP header field,
Execution-Context, is defined for transporting ECTs alongside
existing WIMSE headers. ECTs are a technical building block that
supports, but does not by itself constitute, compliance with
regulatory frameworks.<a href="#section-abstract-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
<div id="status-of-memo">
<section id="section-boilerplate.1">
<h2 id="name-status-of-this-memo">
<a href="#name-status-of-this-memo" class="section-name selfRef">Status of This Memo</a>
</h2>
<p id="section-boilerplate.1-1">
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-boilerplate.1-2">
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working
documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is
at <span><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/">https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/</a></span>.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-boilerplate.1-3">
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-boilerplate.1-4">
This Internet-Draft will expire on 28 August 2026.<a href="#section-boilerplate.1-4" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="copyright">
<section id="section-boilerplate.2">
<h2 id="name-copyright-notice">
<a href="#name-copyright-notice" class="section-name selfRef">Copyright Notice</a>
</h2>
<p id="section-boilerplate.2-1">
Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.<a href="#section-boilerplate.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-boilerplate.2-2">
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(<span><a href="https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a></span>) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Revised BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.<a href="#section-boilerplate.2-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="toc">
<section id="section-toc.1">
<a href="#" onclick="scroll(0,0)" class="toplink"></a><h2 id="name-table-of-contents">
<a href="#name-table-of-contents" class="section-name selfRef">Table of Contents</a>
</h2>
<nav class="toc"><ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.1.1"><a href="#section-1" class="auto internal xref">1</a>.  <a href="#name-introduction" class="internal xref">Introduction</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.1.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-1.1" class="auto internal xref">1.1</a>.  <a href="#name-motivation" class="internal xref">Motivation</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.2.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-1.2" class="auto internal xref">1.2</a>.  <a href="#name-problem-statement" class="internal xref">Problem Statement</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.3.1" class="keepWithNext"><a href="#section-1.3" class="auto internal xref">1.3</a>.  <a href="#name-scope-and-applicability" class="internal xref">Scope and Applicability</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.1.2.4.1"><a href="#section-1.4" class="auto internal xref">1.4</a>.  <a href="#name-relationship-to-regulatory-" class="internal xref">Relationship to Regulatory Compliance</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.2.1"><a href="#section-2" class="auto internal xref">2</a>.  <a href="#name-conventions-and-definitions" class="internal xref">Conventions and Definitions</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.3.1"><a href="#section-3" class="auto internal xref">3</a>.  <a href="#name-wimse-architecture-integrat" class="internal xref">WIMSE Architecture Integration</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.3.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.3.2.1.1"><a href="#section-3.1" class="auto internal xref">3.1</a>.  <a href="#name-wimse-foundation" class="internal xref">WIMSE Foundation</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.3.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.3.2.2.1"><a href="#section-3.2" class="auto internal xref">3.2</a>.  <a href="#name-extension-model" class="internal xref">Extension Model</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.3.2.3.1"><a href="#section-3.3" class="auto internal xref">3.3</a>.  <a href="#name-integration-points" class="internal xref">Integration Points</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.1"><a href="#section-4" class="auto internal xref">4</a>.  <a href="#name-execution-context-token-for" class="internal xref">Execution Context Token Format</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1.1"><a href="#section-4.1" class="auto internal xref">4.1</a>.  <a href="#name-jose-header" class="internal xref">JOSE Header</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.1"><a href="#section-4.2" class="auto internal xref">4.2</a>.  <a href="#name-jwt-claims" class="internal xref">JWT Claims</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-4.2.1" class="auto internal xref">4.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-wimse-compatible-claims" class="internal xref">WIMSE-Compatible Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.2.1"><a href="#section-4.2.2" class="auto internal xref">4.2.2</a>.  <a href="#name-execution-context-claims" class="internal xref">Execution Context Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.3.1"><a href="#section-4.2.3" class="auto internal xref">4.2.3</a>.  <a href="#name-policy-claims" class="internal xref">Policy Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.4.1"><a href="#section-4.2.4" class="auto internal xref">4.2.4</a>.  <a href="#name-data-integrity-claims" class="internal xref">Data Integrity Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.5">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.5.1"><a href="#section-4.2.5" class="auto internal xref">4.2.5</a>.  <a href="#name-operational-claims" class="internal xref">Operational Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.6">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.6.1"><a href="#section-4.2.6" class="auto internal xref">4.2.6</a>.  <a href="#name-witness-claims" class="internal xref">Witness Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.7">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.7.1"><a href="#section-4.2.7" class="auto internal xref">4.2.7</a>.  <a href="#name-compensation-claims" class="internal xref">Compensation Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.8">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.2.8.1"><a href="#section-4.2.8" class="auto internal xref">4.2.8</a>.  <a href="#name-extension-claims" class="internal xref">Extension Claims</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.1"><a href="#section-4.3" class="auto internal xref">4.3</a>.  <a href="#name-complete-ect-example" class="internal xref">Complete ECT Example</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.5">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.5.1"><a href="#section-5" class="auto internal xref">5</a>.  <a href="#name-http-header-transport" class="internal xref">HTTP Header Transport</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.5.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.5.2.1.1"><a href="#section-5.1" class="auto internal xref">5.1</a>.  <a href="#name-execution-context-header-fi" class="internal xref">Execution-Context Header Field</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.6.1"><a href="#section-6" class="auto internal xref">6</a>.  <a href="#name-dag-validation" class="internal xref">DAG Validation</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.1"><a href="#section-6.1" class="auto internal xref">6.1</a>.  <a href="#name-overview" class="internal xref">Overview</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.1"><a href="#section-6.2" class="auto internal xref">6.2</a>.  <a href="#name-validation-rules" class="internal xref">Validation Rules</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.1"><a href="#section-6.3" class="auto internal xref">6.3</a>.  <a href="#name-dag-validation-algorithm" class="internal xref">DAG Validation Algorithm</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.7.1"><a href="#section-7" class="auto internal xref">7</a>.  <a href="#name-signature-and-token-verific" class="internal xref">Signature and Token Verification</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.1.1"><a href="#section-7.1" class="auto internal xref">7.1</a>.  <a href="#name-verification-procedure" class="internal xref">Verification Procedure</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.7.2.2.1"><a href="#section-7.2" class="auto internal xref">7.2</a>.  <a href="#name-verification-pseudocode" class="internal xref">Verification Pseudocode</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.8.1"><a href="#section-8" class="auto internal xref">8</a>.  <a href="#name-audit-ledger-interface" class="internal xref">Audit Ledger Interface</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.1"><a href="#section-8.1" class="auto internal xref">8.1</a>.  <a href="#name-overview-2" class="internal xref">Overview</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.1"><a href="#section-8.2" class="auto internal xref">8.2</a>.  <a href="#name-required-properties" class="internal xref">Required Properties</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3.1"><a href="#section-8.3" class="auto internal xref">8.3</a>.  <a href="#name-ledger-entry-structure" class="internal xref">Ledger Entry Structure</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.9.1"><a href="#section-9" class="auto internal xref">9</a>.  <a href="#name-use-cases" class="internal xref">Use Cases</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.1" class="auto internal xref">9.1</a>.  <a href="#name-medical-device-sdlc-workflo" class="internal xref">Medical Device SDLC Workflow</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.2.1.1"><a href="#section-9.1.1" class="auto internal xref">9.1.1</a>.  <a href="#name-fda-audit-with-dag-reconstr" class="internal xref">FDA Audit with DAG Reconstruction</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2.1"><a href="#section-9.2" class="auto internal xref">9.2</a>.  <a href="#name-financial-trading-workflow" class="internal xref">Financial Trading Workflow</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.3.1"><a href="#section-9.3" class="auto internal xref">9.3</a>.  <a href="#name-compensation-and-rollback" class="internal xref">Compensation and Rollback</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.9.2.4.1"><a href="#section-9.4" class="auto internal xref">9.4</a>.  <a href="#name-autonomous-logistics-coordi" class="internal xref">Autonomous Logistics Coordination</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.1"><a href="#section-10" class="auto internal xref">10</a>. <a href="#name-security-considerations" class="internal xref">Security Considerations</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.1.1"><a href="#section-10.1" class="auto internal xref">10.1</a>.  <a href="#name-threat-model" class="internal xref">Threat Model</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.1"><a href="#section-10.2" class="auto internal xref">10.2</a>.  <a href="#name-self-assertion-limitation" class="internal xref">Self-Assertion Limitation</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.2.2.1.1"><a href="#section-10.2.1" class="auto internal xref">10.2.1</a>.  <a href="#name-witness-attestation-model" class="internal xref">Witness Attestation Model</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.3.1"><a href="#section-10.3" class="auto internal xref">10.3</a>.  <a href="#name-organizational-prerequisite" class="internal xref">Organizational Prerequisites</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.4.1"><a href="#section-10.4" class="auto internal xref">10.4</a>.  <a href="#name-signature-verification" class="internal xref">Signature Verification</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.5">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.5.1"><a href="#section-10.5" class="auto internal xref">10.5</a>.  <a href="#name-replay-attack-prevention" class="internal xref">Replay Attack Prevention</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.6">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.6.1"><a href="#section-10.6" class="auto internal xref">10.6</a>.  <a href="#name-man-in-the-middle-protectio" class="internal xref">Man-in-the-Middle Protection</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.7">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.7.1"><a href="#section-10.7" class="auto internal xref">10.7</a>.  <a href="#name-key-compromise" class="internal xref">Key Compromise</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.8">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.8.1"><a href="#section-10.8" class="auto internal xref">10.8</a>.  <a href="#name-collusion-and-false-claims" class="internal xref">Collusion and False Claims</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.9">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.9.1"><a href="#section-10.9" class="auto internal xref">10.9</a>.  <a href="#name-denial-of-service" class="internal xref">Denial of Service</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.10">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.10.1"><a href="#section-10.10" class="auto internal xref">10.10</a>. <a href="#name-timestamp-accuracy" class="internal xref">Timestamp Accuracy</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.11">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.10.2.11.1"><a href="#section-10.11" class="auto internal xref">10.11</a>. <a href="#name-ect-size-constraints" class="internal xref">ECT Size Constraints</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.11.1"><a href="#section-11" class="auto internal xref">11</a>. <a href="#name-privacy-considerations" class="internal xref">Privacy Considerations</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.1.1"><a href="#section-11.1" class="auto internal xref">11.1</a>.  <a href="#name-data-exposure-in-ects" class="internal xref">Data Exposure in ECTs</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.2.1"><a href="#section-11.2" class="auto internal xref">11.2</a>.  <a href="#name-data-minimization" class="internal xref">Data Minimization</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.3.1"><a href="#section-11.3" class="auto internal xref">11.3</a>.  <a href="#name-storage-and-access-control" class="internal xref">Storage and Access Control</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.11.2.4.1"><a href="#section-11.4" class="auto internal xref">11.4</a>.  <a href="#name-regulatory-access" class="internal xref">Regulatory Access</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.12.1"><a href="#section-12" class="auto internal xref">12</a>. <a href="#name-iana-considerations" class="internal xref">IANA Considerations</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.1.1"><a href="#section-12.1" class="auto internal xref">12.1</a>.  <a href="#name-media-type-registration" class="internal xref">Media Type Registration</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.2.1"><a href="#section-12.2" class="auto internal xref">12.2</a>.  <a href="#name-http-header-field-registrat" class="internal xref">HTTP Header Field Registration</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.3.1"><a href="#section-12.3" class="auto internal xref">12.3</a>.  <a href="#name-jwt-claims-registration" class="internal xref">JWT Claims Registration</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.4.1"><a href="#section-12.4" class="auto internal xref">12.4</a>.  <a href="#name-ect-policy-decision-values-" class="internal xref">ECT Policy Decision Values Registry</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.5">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.12.2.5.1"><a href="#section-12.5" class="auto internal xref">12.5</a>.  <a href="#name-ect-regulated-domain-values" class="internal xref">ECT Regulated Domain Values Registry</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.13">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.13.1"><a href="#section-13" class="auto internal xref">13</a>. <a href="#name-references" class="internal xref">References</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.13.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.13.2.1.1"><a href="#section-13.1" class="auto internal xref">13.1</a>.  <a href="#name-normative-references" class="internal xref">Normative References</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.13.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.13.2.2.1"><a href="#section-13.2" class="auto internal xref">13.2</a>.  <a href="#name-informative-references" class="internal xref">Informative References</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.1"><a href="#appendix-A" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-related-work" class="internal xref">Related Work</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.1.1"><a href="#appendix-A.1" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-wimse-workload-identity" class="internal xref">WIMSE Workload Identity</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.2.1"><a href="#appendix-A.2" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-oauth-20-token-exchange" class="internal xref">OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.3.1"><a href="#appendix-A.3" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-distributed-tracing-opentel" class="internal xref">Distributed Tracing (OpenTelemetry)</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.4.1"><a href="#appendix-A.4" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-blockchain-and-distributed-" class="internal xref">Blockchain and Distributed Ledgers</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.5">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.5.1"><a href="#appendix-A.5" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-scitt-supply-chain-integrit" class="internal xref">SCITT (Supply Chain Integrity, Transparency, and Trust)</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.6">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.14.2.6.1"><a href="#appendix-A.6" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-w3c-verifiable-credentials" class="internal xref">W3C Verifiable Credentials</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.15.1"><a href="#appendix-B" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-implementation-guidance" class="internal xref">Implementation Guidance</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.1.1"><a href="#appendix-B.1" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-minimal-implementation" class="internal xref">Minimal Implementation</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.2.1"><a href="#appendix-B.2" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-storage-recommendations" class="internal xref">Storage Recommendations</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.3.1"><a href="#appendix-B.3" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-performance-considerations" class="internal xref">Performance Considerations</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.4">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.15.2.4.1"><a href="#appendix-B.4" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-interoperability" class="internal xref">Interoperability</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.16">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.16.1"><a href="#appendix-C" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-regulatory-compliance-mappi" class="internal xref">Regulatory Compliance Mapping</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.17.1"><a href="#appendix-D" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-examples" class="internal xref">Examples</a></p>
<ul class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty">
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.1">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.1.1"><a href="#appendix-D.1" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-example-1-simple-two-agent-" class="internal xref">Example 1: Simple Two-Agent Workflow</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.2">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.2.1"><a href="#appendix-D.2" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-example-2-medical-device-sd" class="internal xref">Example 2: Medical Device SDLC with Release Approval</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.3">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.17.2.3.1"><a href="#appendix-D.3" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-example-3-parallel-executio" class="internal xref">Example 3: Parallel Execution with Join</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.18">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.18.1"><a href="#appendix-E" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-acknowledgments" class="internal xref">Acknowledgments</a></p>
</li>
<li class="compact toc ulBare ulEmpty" id="section-toc.1-1.19">
<p id="section-toc.1-1.19.1"><a href="#appendix-F" class="auto internal xref"></a><a href="#name-authors-address" class="internal xref">Author's Address</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</nav>
</section>
</div>
<div id="introduction">
<section id="section-1">
<h2 id="name-introduction">
<a href="#section-1" class="section-number selfRef">1. </a><a href="#name-introduction" class="section-name selfRef">Introduction</a>
</h2>
<div id="motivation">
<section id="section-1.1">
<h3 id="name-motivation">
<a href="#section-1.1" class="section-number selfRef">1.1. </a><a href="#name-motivation" class="section-name selfRef">Motivation</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-1.1-1">The Workload Identity in Multi System Environments (WIMSE)
framework <span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-arch" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-arch</a>]</span> provides robust workload
authentication through Workload Identity Tokens (WIT) and Workload
Proof Tokens (WPT). The WIMSE service-to-service protocol
<span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol</a>]</span> defines how workloads authenticate
each other across call chains using the Workload-Identity and
Workload-Proof-Token HTTP headers.<a href="#section-1.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-1.1-2">However, workload identity alone does not address execution
accountability. Knowing who performed an action does not prove
what was done, what policy was applied, or whether compliance
requirements were satisfied at each decision point.<a href="#section-1.1-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-1.1-3">Regulated environments increasingly deploy autonomous agents that
coordinate across organizational boundaries. Multiple regulatory
frameworks motivate the need for structured execution records:<a href="#section-1.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-1.1-4.1">
<p id="section-1.1-4.1.1">The EU Artificial Intelligence Act <span>[<a href="#EU-AI-ACT" class="cite xref">EU-AI-ACT</a>]</span> Article 12
requires high-risk AI systems to be designed with capabilities
enabling automatic recording of events ("logs") while the
system is operating.<a href="#section-1.1-4.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.1-4.2">
<p id="section-1.1-4.2.1">The U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 <span>[<a href="#FDA-21CFR11" class="cite xref">FDA-21CFR11</a>]</span> requires
computer-generated, timestamped audit trails that independently
record the date, time, operator identity, and actions taken
(Section 11.10(e)).<a href="#section-1.1-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.1-4.3">
<p id="section-1.1-4.3.1">The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II)
<span>[<a href="#MIFID-II" class="cite xref">MIFID-II</a>]</span> requires firms to maintain records of transactions
and orders that are sufficient to enable supervisory authorities
to monitor compliance.<a href="#section-1.1-4.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.1-4.4">
<p id="section-1.1-4.4.1">The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) <span>[<a href="#DORA" class="cite xref">DORA</a>]</span> Article 12
requires financial entities to have logging policies that record
ICT activities and anomalies.<a href="#section-1.1-4.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-1.1-5">This document defines an extension to the WIMSE architecture that
addresses the gap between workload identity and execution
accountability. WIMSE authenticates agents; this extension records
what they did, in what order, and what policy was evaluated.<a href="#section-1.1-5" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-1.1-6">As identified in <span>[<a href="#I-D.ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity" class="cite xref">I-D.ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity</a>]</span>, call context
in agentic workflows needs to be visible and preserved. ECTs
provide a mechanism to address this requirement with cryptographic
assurances.<a href="#section-1.1-6" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="problem-statement">
<section id="section-1.2">
<h3 id="name-problem-statement">
<a href="#section-1.2" class="section-number selfRef">1.2. </a><a href="#name-problem-statement" class="section-name selfRef">Problem Statement</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-1.2-1">Three core gaps exist in current approaches to regulated agentic
systems:<a href="#section-1.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="section-1.2-2">
<li id="section-1.2-2.1">
<p id="section-1.2-2.1.1">WIMSE authenticates agents but does not record what they
actually did. A WIT proves "Agent A is authorized" but not
"Agent A executed Task X, under Policy Y, producing Output Z."<a href="#section-1.2-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-1.2-2.2">
<p id="section-1.2-2.2.1">No standard mechanism exists to record policy evaluation
outcomes at each decision point in a multi-agent workflow.<a href="#section-1.2-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-1.2-2.3">
<p id="section-1.2-2.3.1">No mechanism exists to cryptographically link compensation and
rollback decisions to original actions.<a href="#section-1.2-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ol>
<p id="section-1.2-3">Existing observability tools such as distributed tracing
<span>[<a href="#OPENTELEMETRY" class="cite xref">OPENTELEMETRY</a>]</span> provide visibility for debugging and monitoring
but do not provide cryptographic assurances. Tracing data is not
cryptographically signed, not tamper-evident, and not designed for
regulatory audit scenarios.<a href="#section-1.2-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="scope-and-applicability">
<section id="section-1.3">
<h3 id="name-scope-and-applicability">
<a href="#section-1.3" class="section-number selfRef">1.3. </a><a href="#name-scope-and-applicability" class="section-name selfRef">Scope and Applicability</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-1.3-1">This document defines:<a href="#section-1.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-2.1">
<p id="section-1.3-2.1.1">The Execution Context Token (ECT) format (<a href="#ect-format" class="auto internal xref">Section 4</a>)<a href="#section-1.3-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-2.2">
<p id="section-1.3-2.2.1">DAG structure for task dependency ordering (<a href="#dag-validation" class="auto internal xref">Section 6</a>)<a href="#section-1.3-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-2.3">
<p id="section-1.3-2.3.1">Policy checkpoint recording (<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>)<a href="#section-1.3-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-2.4">
<p id="section-1.3-2.4.1">Integration with the WIMSE identity framework
(<a href="#wimse-integration" class="auto internal xref">Section 3</a>)<a href="#section-1.3-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-2.5">
<p id="section-1.3-2.5.1">An HTTP header for ECT transport (<a href="#http-header" class="auto internal xref">Section 5</a>)<a href="#section-1.3-2.5.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-2.6">
<p id="section-1.3-2.6.1">Audit ledger interface requirements (<a href="#ledger-interface" class="auto internal xref">Section 8</a>)<a href="#section-1.3-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-1.3-3">The following are out of scope and are handled by WIMSE:<a href="#section-1.3-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-4.1">
<p id="section-1.3-4.1.1">Workload authentication and identity provisioning<a href="#section-1.3-4.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-4.2">
<p id="section-1.3-4.2.1">Key distribution and management<a href="#section-1.3-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-4.3">
<p id="section-1.3-4.3.1">Trust domain establishment and management<a href="#section-1.3-4.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-1.3-4.4">
<p id="section-1.3-4.4.1">Credential lifecycle management<a href="#section-1.3-4.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="relationship-to-regulatory-compliance">
<section id="section-1.4">
<h3 id="name-relationship-to-regulatory-">
<a href="#section-1.4" class="section-number selfRef">1.4. </a><a href="#name-relationship-to-regulatory-" class="section-name selfRef">Relationship to Regulatory Compliance</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-1.4-1">ECTs are a technical mechanism that can support compliance programs
by providing structured, cryptographically signed execution
records. ECTs do not by themselves constitute compliance with any
regulatory framework referenced in this document.<a href="#section-1.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-1.4-2">Compliance with each referenced regulation requires organizational
controls, policies, procedures, validation, and governance measures
beyond the scope of this specification. The regulatory references
in this document are intended to motivate the design requirements,
not to claim that implementing ECTs satisfies these regulations.<a href="#section-1.4-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-1.4-3">ECTs provide evidence of claimed execution ordering and policy
evaluation. They do not independently verify that the claimed
execution actually occurred as described, that the policy
evaluation was correct, or that the agent faithfully performed the
stated action. The trustworthiness of ECT claims depends on the
trustworthiness of the signing agent and the integrity of the
broader deployment environment.<a href="#section-1.4-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="conventions-and-definitions">
<section id="section-2">
<h2 id="name-conventions-and-definitions">
<a href="#section-2" class="section-number selfRef">2. </a><a href="#name-conventions-and-definitions" class="section-name selfRef">Conventions and Definitions</a>
</h2>
<p id="section-2-1">The key words "<span class="bcp14">MUST</span>", "<span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span>", "<span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>", "<span class="bcp14">SHALL</span>", "<span class="bcp14">SHALL NOT</span>", "<span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span>", "<span class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</span>", "<span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span>", "<span class="bcp14">NOT RECOMMENDED</span>",
"<span class="bcp14">MAY</span>", and "<span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in BCP 14 <span>[<a href="#RFC2119" class="cite xref">RFC2119</a>]</span> <span>[<a href="#RFC8174" class="cite xref">RFC8174</a>]</span> when, and only when, they
appear in all capitals, as shown here.<a href="#section-2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-2-2">The following terms are used in this document:<a href="#section-2-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-2-3">
<dt id="section-2-3.1">Agent:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.2">
<p id="section-2-3.2.1">An autonomous workload, as defined by WIMSE
<span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-arch" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-arch</a>]</span>, that executes tasks within a workflow.<a href="#section-2-3.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.3">Task:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.4">
<p id="section-2-3.4.1">A discrete unit of agent work that consumes inputs and produces
outputs.<a href="#section-2-3.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.5">Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG):</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.6">
<p id="section-2-3.6.1">A graph structure representing task dependency ordering where
edges are directed and no cycles exist.<a href="#section-2-3.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.7">Execution Context Token (ECT):</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.8">
<p id="section-2-3.8.1">A JSON Web Token <span>[<a href="#RFC7519" class="cite xref">RFC7519</a>]</span> defined by this specification that
records task execution details and policy evaluation outcomes.<a href="#section-2-3.8.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.9">Audit Ledger:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.10">
<p id="section-2-3.10.1">An append-only, immutable log of all ECTs within a workflow or
set of workflows, used for regulatory audit and compliance
verification.<a href="#section-2-3.10.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.11">Policy Checkpoint:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.12">
<p id="section-2-3.12.1">A point in a workflow where a policy evaluation outcome is
recorded within an ECT.<a href="#section-2-3.12.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.13">Workload Identity Token (WIT):</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.14">
<p id="section-2-3.14.1">A WIMSE credential proving a workload's identity within a trust
domain.<a href="#section-2-3.14.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.15">Workload Proof Token (WPT):</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.16">
<p id="section-2-3.16.1">A WIMSE proof-of-possession token used for request-level
authentication.<a href="#section-2-3.16.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.17">Trust Domain:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.18">
<p id="section-2-3.18.1">A WIMSE concept representing an organizational boundary with a
shared identity issuer, corresponding to a SPIFFE <span>[<a href="#SPIFFE" class="cite xref">SPIFFE</a>]</span>
trust domain.<a href="#section-2-3.18.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-2-3.19">Witness:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-2-3.20">
<p id="section-2-3.20.1">A third-party entity that observes and attests to the execution
of a task, providing additional accountability.<a href="#section-2-3.20.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="wimse-integration">
<section id="section-3">
<h2 id="name-wimse-architecture-integrat">
<a href="#section-3" class="section-number selfRef">3. </a><a href="#name-wimse-architecture-integrat" class="section-name selfRef">WIMSE Architecture Integration</a>
</h2>
<div id="wimse-foundation">
<section id="section-3.1">
<h3 id="name-wimse-foundation">
<a href="#section-3.1" class="section-number selfRef">3.1. </a><a href="#name-wimse-foundation" class="section-name selfRef">WIMSE Foundation</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-3.1-1">The WIMSE architecture <span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-arch" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-arch</a>]</span> defines:<a href="#section-3.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-2.1">
<p id="section-3.1-2.1.1">Workload Identity Tokens (WIT) that prove a workload's identity
within a trust domain ("I am Agent X in trust domain Y")<a href="#section-3.1-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-2.2">
<p id="section-3.1-2.2.1">Workload Proof Tokens (WPT) that prove possession of the private
key associated with a WIT ("I control the key for Agent X")<a href="#section-3.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-2.3">
<p id="section-3.1-2.3.1">Multi-hop authentication via the service-to-service protocol
<span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol</a>]</span><a href="#section-3.1-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-3.1-3">The following execution accountability needs are complementary to
the WIMSE scope and are not addressed by workload identity alone:<a href="#section-3.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-4.1">
<p id="section-3.1-4.1.1">Recording what agents actually do with their authenticated
identity<a href="#section-3.1-4.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-4.2">
<p id="section-3.1-4.2.1">Recording policy evaluation outcomes at each hop<a href="#section-3.1-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-4.3">
<p id="section-3.1-4.3.1">Maintaining structured execution records<a href="#section-3.1-4.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.1-4.4">
<p id="section-3.1-4.4.1">Linking compensation or rollback actions to original tasks<a href="#section-3.1-4.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="extension-model">
<section id="section-3.2">
<h3 id="name-extension-model">
<a href="#section-3.2" class="section-number selfRef">3.2. </a><a href="#name-extension-model" class="section-name selfRef">Extension Model</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-3.2-1">ECTs extend WIMSE by adding an execution accountability layer
between the identity layer and the application layer:<a href="#section-3.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-wimse-extension-architectur"></span><div id="fig-layers">
<figure id="figure-1">
<div class="alignLeft art-ascii-art art-text artwork" id="section-3.2-2.1">
<pre>
+--------------------------------------------------+
| WIMSE Layer (Identity) |
| WIT: "I am Agent X (spiffe://td/agent/x)" |
| WPT: "I prove I control the key for Agent X" |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|
v
+--------------------------------------------------+
| ECT Layer (Execution Accountability) [This Spec]|
| ECT: "Task executed, dependencies met, |
| policy evaluated, outcome recorded" |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|
v
+--------------------------------------------------+
| Ledger Layer (Immutable Record) |
| "All ECTs appended to audit ledger" |
+--------------------------------------------------+
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-1" class="selfRef">Figure 1</a>:
<a href="#name-wimse-extension-architectur" class="selfRef">WIMSE Extension Architecture Layers</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-3.2-3">This extension reuses the WIMSE signing model, extends JWT claims
using standard JWT extensibility <span>[<a href="#RFC7519" class="cite xref">RFC7519</a>]</span>, and maintains WIMSE
concepts including trust domains and workload identifiers.<a href="#section-3.2-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="integration-points">
<section id="section-3.3">
<h3 id="name-integration-points">
<a href="#section-3.3" class="section-number selfRef">3.3. </a><a href="#name-integration-points" class="section-name selfRef">Integration Points</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-3.3-1">An ECT integrates with the WIMSE identity framework through the
following mechanisms:<a href="#section-3.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-3.3-2.1">
<p id="section-3.3-2.1.1">The ECT JOSE header "kid" parameter <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> reference the public
key identifier from the agent's WIT.<a href="#section-3.3-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.3-2.2">
<p id="section-3.3-2.2.1">The ECT "iss" claim <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> use the WIMSE workload identifier
format (a SPIFFE ID <span>[<a href="#SPIFFE" class="cite xref">SPIFFE</a>]</span>).<a href="#section-3.3-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.3-2.3">
<p id="section-3.3-2.3.1">The ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be signed with the same private key used to
generate the agent's WPT.<a href="#section-3.3-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-3.3-2.4">
<p id="section-3.3-2.4.1">The ECT signing algorithm (JOSE header "alg" parameter) <span class="bcp14">MUST</span>
match the algorithm used in the corresponding WIT.<a href="#section-3.3-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-3.3-3">When an agent makes an HTTP request to another agent, the three
tokens are carried in their respective HTTP header fields:<a href="#section-3.3-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-http-header-stacking"></span><div id="fig-http-headers">
<figure id="figure-2">
<div class="alignLeft art-ascii-art art-text artwork" id="section-3.3-4.1">
<pre>
HTTP Request from Agent A to Agent B:
Workload-Identity: &lt;WIT for Agent A&gt;
Workload-Proof-Token: &lt;WPT proving A controls key&gt;
Execution-Context: &lt;ECT recording what A did&gt;
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-2" class="selfRef">Figure 2</a>:
<a href="#name-http-header-stacking" class="selfRef">HTTP Header Stacking</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-3.3-5">The receiving agent (Agent B) verifies in order:<a href="#section-3.3-5" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="section-3.3-6">
<li id="section-3.3-6.1">
<p id="section-3.3-6.1.1">WIT and WPT (WIMSE layer): Proves who Agent A is and that the
request is authentic.<a href="#section-3.3-6.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-3.3-6.2">
<p id="section-3.3-6.2.1">ECT (this extension): Records what Agent A did, what policy was
evaluated, and what precedent tasks exist.<a href="#section-3.3-6.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-3.3-6.3">
<p id="section-3.3-6.3.1">Ledger: Appends the verified ECT to the audit ledger.<a href="#section-3.3-6.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ol>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="ect-format">
<section id="section-4">
<h2 id="name-execution-context-token-for">
<a href="#section-4" class="section-number selfRef">4. </a><a href="#name-execution-context-token-for" class="section-name selfRef">Execution Context Token Format</a>
</h2>
<p id="section-4-1">An Execution Context Token is a JSON Web Token (JWT) <span>[<a href="#RFC7519" class="cite xref">RFC7519</a>]</span>
signed as a JSON Web Signature (JWS) <span>[<a href="#RFC7515" class="cite xref">RFC7515</a>]</span> using the Compact
Serialization. JWS JSON Serialization <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> be used for ECTs.<a href="#section-4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div id="jose-header">
<section id="section-4.1">
<h3 id="name-jose-header">
<a href="#section-4.1" class="section-number selfRef">4.1. </a><a href="#name-jose-header" class="section-name selfRef">JOSE Header</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-4.1-1">The ECT JOSE header <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> contain the following parameters:<a href="#section-4.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-ect-jose-header-example"></span><div id="fig-header">
<figure id="figure-3">
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="section-4.1-2.1">
<pre>
{
"alg": "ES256",
"typ": "wimse-exec+jwt",
"kid": "agent-a-key-id-123"
}
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-3" class="selfRef">Figure 3</a>:
<a href="#name-ect-jose-header-example" class="selfRef">ECT JOSE Header Example</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.1-3">
<dt id="section-4.1-3.1">alg:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.1-3.2">
<p id="section-4.1-3.2.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. The digital signature algorithm used to sign the ECT.
<span class="bcp14">MUST</span> match the algorithm in the corresponding WIT.
Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> support ES256 <span>[<a href="#RFC7518" class="cite xref">RFC7518</a>]</span>. The "alg"
value <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> be "none". Symmetric algorithms (e.g., HS256,
HS384, HS512) <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> be used, as ECTs require asymmetric
signatures for non-repudiation.<a href="#section-4.1-3.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.1-3.3">typ:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.1-3.4">
<p id="section-4.1-3.4.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be set to "wimse-exec+jwt" to distinguish ECTs
from other JWT types, consistent with the WIMSE convention for
type parameter values.<a href="#section-4.1-3.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.1-3.5">kid:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.1-3.6">
<p id="section-4.1-3.6.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. The key identifier referencing the public key from
the agent's WIT <span>[<a href="#RFC7517" class="cite xref">RFC7517</a>]</span>. Used by verifiers to look up the
correct public key for signature verification.<a href="#section-4.1-3.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="jwt-claims">
<section id="section-4.2">
<h3 id="name-jwt-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2" class="section-number selfRef">4.2. </a><a href="#name-jwt-claims" class="section-name selfRef">JWT Claims</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-4.2-1">The ECT payload contains both WIMSE-compatible standard JWT claims
and execution context claims defined by this specification.<a href="#section-4.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div id="wimse-compatible-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.1">
<h4 id="name-wimse-compatible-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.1. </a><a href="#name-wimse-compatible-claims" class="section-name selfRef">WIMSE-Compatible Claims</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-4.2.1-1">The following standard JWT claims <span>[<a href="#RFC7519" class="cite xref">RFC7519</a>]</span> <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be present in
every ECT:<a href="#section-4.2.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.1-2">
<dt id="section-4.2.1-2.1">iss:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.2.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. StringOrURI. The issuer of the ECT, which <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be
the workload's SPIFFE ID in the format
<code>spiffe://&lt;trust-domain&gt;/&lt;path&gt;</code>. This <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> match the "sub"
claim of the agent's WIT.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.1-2.3">sub:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-2.4">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.4.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. StringOrURI. The subject of the ECT. When present,
<span class="bcp14">MUST</span> equal the "iss" claim. This claim is included for
compatibility with JWT libraries and frameworks that expect a
"sub" claim to be present.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.1-2.5">aud:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-2.6">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.6.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. StringOrURI or array of StringOrURI. The intended
recipient(s) of the ECT. Because ECTs serve as both inter-agent
messages and audit records, the "aud" claim <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> contain the
identifiers of all entities that will verify the ECT. In
practice this means:<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-4.2.1-2.6.2.1">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.6.2.1.1"><strong>Point-to-point delivery</strong>: when an ECT is sent from one
agent to a single next agent, "aud" contains that agent's
workload identity. The receiving agent verifies the ECT and
forwards it to the ledger on behalf of the issuer.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.6.2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-4.2.1-2.6.2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.6.2.2.1"><strong>Direct-to-ledger submission</strong>: when an ECT is submitted
directly to the audit ledger (e.g., after a join or at
workflow completion), "aud" contains the ledger's identity.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.6.2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-4.2.1-2.6.2.3">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.6.2.3.1"><strong>Multi-audience</strong>: when an ECT must be verified by both the
next agent and the ledger independently, "aud" <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be an
array containing both identifiers (e.g.,
["spiffe://example.com/agent/next",
"spiffe://example.com/system/ledger"]). Each verifier checks
that its own identity appears in the array.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.6.2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.6.3">In multi-parent (join) scenarios where a task depends on ECTs
from multiple parent agents, the joining agent creates a new ECT
with the parent task IDs in "par". The "aud" of this new ECT
is set according to the rules above based on where the ECT will
be delivered — it is independent of the "aud" values in the
parent ECTs.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.6.3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.1-2.7">iat:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-2.8">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.8.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. NumericDate. The time at which the ECT was issued.
The ECT records a completed action, so the "iat" value reflects
when the record was created, not when task execution began.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.8.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.1-2.9">exp:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-2.10">
<p id="section-4.2.1-2.10.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. NumericDate. The expiration time of the ECT.
Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> set this to 5 to 15 minutes after "iat"
to limit the replay window while allowing for reasonable clock
skew and processing time.<a href="#section-4.2.1-2.10.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
<p id="section-4.2.1-3">The standard JWT "nbf" (Not Before) claim is not used in ECTs
because ECTs record completed actions and are valid immediately
upon issuance.<a href="#section-4.2.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.1-4">
<dt id="section-4.2.1-4.1">jti:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.1-4.2">
<p id="section-4.2.1-4.2.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. String. A unique identifier for the ECT in UUID
format <span>[<a href="#RFC9562" class="cite xref">RFC9562</a>]</span>. Used for replay detection: receivers <span class="bcp14">MUST</span>
reject ECTs whose "jti" has already been seen within the
expiration window. The "jti" value <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be unique across all
ECTs issued by the same agent.<a href="#section-4.2.1-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="exec-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.2">
<h4 id="name-execution-context-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.2" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.2. </a><a href="#name-execution-context-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Execution Context Claims</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-4.2.2-1">The following claims are defined by this specification:<a href="#section-4.2.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.2-2">
<dt id="section-4.2.2-2.1">wid:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.2-2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.2-2.2.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. A workflow identifier that groups related
ECTs into a single workflow. When present, <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be a UUID
<span>[<a href="#RFC9562" class="cite xref">RFC9562</a>]</span>. When absent, the "tid" uniqueness requirement
applies globally across the entire ledger.<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.2-2.3">tid:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.2-2.4">
<p id="section-4.2.2-2.4.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. String. A globally unique task identifier in UUID
format <span>[<a href="#RFC9562" class="cite xref">RFC9562</a>]</span>. Each task <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> have a unique "tid" value.
When "wid" is present, uniqueness is scoped to the workflow;
when "wid" is absent, uniqueness <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be enforced globally
across the ledger.<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.2-2.5">exec_act:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.2-2.6">
<p id="section-4.2.2-2.6.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. String. The action or task type identifier describing
what the agent performed (e.g., "process_payment",
"validate_safety", "calculate_dosage"). Note: this claim is
intentionally named "exec_act" rather than "act" to avoid
collision with the "act" (Actor) claim registered by
<span>[<a href="#RFC8693" class="cite xref">RFC8693</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.2-2.7">par:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.2-2.8">
<p id="section-4.2.2-2.8.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. Array of strings. Parent task identifiers
representing DAG dependencies. Each element <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be a valid
"tid" from a previously executed task. An empty array indicates
a root task with no dependencies. A workflow <span class="bcp14">MAY</span> contain
multiple root tasks.<a href="#section-4.2.2-2.8.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="policy-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.3">
<h4 id="name-policy-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.3" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.3. </a><a href="#name-policy-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Policy Claims</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-4.2.3-1">The following claims record policy evaluation outcomes:<a href="#section-4.2.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.3-2">
<dt id="section-4.2.3-2.1">pol:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.3-2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.2.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. String. The identifier of the policy rule that was
evaluated for this task (e.g.,
"clinical_data_access_policy_v1").<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.3-2.3">pol_decision:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.3-2.4">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.4.1"><span class="bcp14">REQUIRED</span>. String. The result of the policy evaluation. <span class="bcp14">MUST</span>
be one of the values registered in the ECT Policy Decision
Values registry (<a href="#pol-decision-registry" class="auto internal xref">Section 12.4</a>). Initial values
are:<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-4.2.3-2.4.2.1">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.4.2.1.1">"approved": The policy evaluation succeeded and the task
was authorized to proceed.<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.4.2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-4.2.3-2.4.2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.4.2.2.1">"rejected": The policy evaluation failed. A "rejected" ECT
<span class="bcp14">MUST</span> still be appended to the audit ledger for accountability.
An ECT with "pol_decision" of "rejected" <span class="bcp14">MAY</span> appear as a
parent in the "par" array of a subsequent ECT, but only for
compensation, rollback, or remediation tasks. Agents <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> proceed with normal workflow execution based on a parent
ECT whose "pol_decision" is "rejected".<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.4.2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-4.2.3-2.4.2.3">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.4.2.3.1">"pending_human_review": The policy evaluation requires human
judgment before proceeding. Agents <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> proceed with
dependent tasks until a subsequent ECT from a human reviewer
records an "approved" decision referencing this task as a
parent.<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.4.2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.3-2.5">pol_enforcer:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.3-2.6">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.6.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. StringOrURI. The identity of the entity (system or
person) that evaluated the policy decision. When present,
<span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use SPIFFE ID format.<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.3-2.7">pol_timestamp:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.3-2.8">
<p id="section-4.2.3-2.8.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. NumericDate. The time at which the policy decision
was made. When present, <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be equal to or earlier than the
"iat" claim.<a href="#section-4.2.3-2.8.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="data-integrity-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.4">
<h4 id="name-data-integrity-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.4" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.4. </a><a href="#name-data-integrity-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Data Integrity Claims</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-4.2.4-1">The following claims provide integrity verification for task
inputs and outputs without revealing the data itself:<a href="#section-4.2.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.4-2">
<dt id="section-4.2.4-2.1">inp_hash:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.4-2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.4-2.2.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. A cryptographic hash of the input data,
formatted as "hash-algorithm:base64url-encoded-hash" (e.g.,
"sha-256:n4bQgYhMfWWaL-qgxVrQFaO_TxsrC4Is0V1sFbDwCgg"). The
hash algorithm identifier <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be a lowercase value from the
IANA Named Information Hash Algorithm Registry (e.g., "sha-256",
"sha-384", "sha-512"). Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> support "sha-256"
and <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use "sha-256" unless a stronger algorithm is
required. Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> accept hash algorithms
weaker than SHA-256 (e.g., MD5, SHA-1). The hash <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be
computed over the raw octets of the input data.<a href="#section-4.2.4-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.4-2.3">out_hash:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.4-2.4">
<p id="section-4.2.4-2.4.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. A cryptographic hash of the output data,
using the same format and algorithm requirements as "inp_hash".<a href="#section-4.2.4-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.4-2.5">inp_classification:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.4-2.6">
<p id="section-4.2.4-2.6.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. The data sensitivity classification of the
input (e.g., "public", "confidential", "restricted").<a href="#section-4.2.4-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="operational-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.5">
<h4 id="name-operational-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.5" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.5. </a><a href="#name-operational-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Operational Claims</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-4.2.5-1">The following claims provide additional operational context:<a href="#section-4.2.5-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.5-2">
<dt id="section-4.2.5-2.1">exec_time_ms:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.5-2.2">
<p id="section-4.2.5-2.2.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. Integer. The execution duration of the task in
milliseconds. <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be a non-negative integer.<a href="#section-4.2.5-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.5-2.3">regulated_domain:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.5-2.4">
<p id="section-4.2.5-2.4.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. The regulatory domain applicable to this
task. Values <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be registered in the ECT Regulated Domain
Values registry (<a href="#regulated-domain-registry" class="auto internal xref">Section 12.5</a>).<a href="#section-4.2.5-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.5-2.5">model_version:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.5-2.6">
<p id="section-4.2.5-2.6.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. The version identifier of the AI or ML model
used to perform the task, if applicable.<a href="#section-4.2.5-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="witness-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.6">
<h4 id="name-witness-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.6" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.6. </a><a href="#name-witness-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Witness Claims</a>
</h4>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.6-1">
<dt id="section-4.2.6-1.1">witnessed_by:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.6-1.2">
<p id="section-4.2.6-1.2.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. Array of StringOrURI. Identifiers of third-party
entities that the issuing agent claims observed or attested to
the execution of this task. When present, each element <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span>
use SPIFFE ID format. Note that this claim is self-asserted by
the ECT issuer; witnesses listed here do not co-sign this ECT.
For stronger assurance, witnesses <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> submit independent
signed ECTs to the ledger attesting to their observation (see
<a href="#witness-attestation-model" class="auto internal xref">Section 10.2.1</a>). In regulated environments,
implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use witness attestation for critical
decision points to mitigate the risk of single-agent false
claims. See also <a href="#self-assertion-limitation" class="auto internal xref">Section 10.2</a> for the security
implications of self-asserted witness claims.<a href="#section-4.2.6-1.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="compensation-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.7">
<h4 id="name-compensation-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.7" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.7. </a><a href="#name-compensation-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Compensation Claims</a>
</h4>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.7-1">
<dt id="section-4.2.7-1.1">compensation_required:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.7-1.2">
<p id="section-4.2.7-1.2.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. Boolean. Indicates whether this task is a
compensation or rollback action for a previous task.<a href="#section-4.2.7-1.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-4.2.7-1.3">compensation_reason:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.7-1.4">
<p id="section-4.2.7-1.4.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. String. A human-readable reason for the compensation
action. <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be present if "compensation_required" is true.
Values <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use structured identifiers (e.g.,
"policy_violation_in_parent_trade") rather than free-form text
to minimize the risk of embedding sensitive information. See
<a href="#data-minimization" class="auto internal xref">Section 11.2</a> for privacy guidance.
If "compensation_reason" is present, "compensation_required"
<span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be true.<a href="#section-4.2.7-1.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
<p id="section-4.2.7-2">Note: compensation ECTs reference historical parent tasks via the
"par" claim. The referenced parent ECTs may have passed their own
"exp" time; ECT expiration applies to the verification window of
the ECT itself, not to its validity as a parent reference in the
ledger.<a href="#section-4.2.7-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="extension-claims">
<section id="section-4.2.8">
<h4 id="name-extension-claims">
<a href="#section-4.2.8" class="section-number selfRef">4.2.8. </a><a href="#name-extension-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Extension Claims</a>
</h4>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-4.2.8-1">
<dt id="section-4.2.8-1.1">ext:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-4.2.8-1.2">
<p id="section-4.2.8-1.2.1"><span class="bcp14">OPTIONAL</span>. Object. An extension object for domain-specific
claims not defined by this specification. Implementations
that do not understand extension claims <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> ignore them.<a href="#section-4.2.8-1.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
<p id="section-4.2.8-2">To avoid key collisions between different domains, extension
key names <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> use reverse domain notation (e.g.,
"com.example.custom_field"). Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> use
unqualified key names within the "ext" object. To prevent
abuse and excessive token size, the serialized JSON
representation of the "ext" object <span class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</span> exceed 4096
bytes, and the JSON nesting depth within the "ext" object
<span class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</span> exceed 5 levels. Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> reject
ECTs whose "ext" claim exceeds these limits.<a href="#section-4.2.8-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="complete-ect-example">
<section id="section-4.3">
<h3 id="name-complete-ect-example">
<a href="#section-4.3" class="section-number selfRef">4.3. </a><a href="#name-complete-ect-example" class="section-name selfRef">Complete ECT Example</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-4.3-1">The following is a complete ECT payload example:<a href="#section-4.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-complete-ect-payload-exampl"></span><div id="fig-full-ect">
<figure id="figure-4">
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="section-4.3-2.1">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://example.com/agent/clinical",
"sub": "spiffe://example.com/agent/clinical",
"aud": "spiffe://example.com/agent/safety",
"iat": 1772064150,
"exp": 1772064750,
"jti": "7f3a8b2c-d1e4-4f56-9a0b-c3d4e5f6a7b8",
"wid": "a0b1c2d3-e4f5-6789-abcd-ef0123456789",
"tid": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440001",
"exec_act": "recommend_treatment",
"par": [],
"pol": "clinical_reasoning_policy_v2",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"pol_enforcer": "spiffe://example.com/policy/clinical-engine",
"pol_timestamp": 1772064145,
"inp_hash": "sha-256:n4bQgYhMfWWaL-qgxVrQFaO_TxsrC4Is0V1sFbDwCgg",
"out_hash": "sha-256:LCa0a2j_xo_5m0U8HTBBNBNCLXBkg7-g-YpeiGJm564",
"inp_classification": "confidential",
"exec_time_ms": 245,
"regulated_domain": "medtech",
"model_version": "clinical-reasoning-v4.2",
"witnessed_by": [
"spiffe://example.com/audit/observer-1"
]
}
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-4" class="selfRef">Figure 4</a>:
<a href="#name-complete-ect-payload-exampl" class="selfRef">Complete ECT Payload Example</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="http-header">
<section id="section-5">
<h2 id="name-http-header-transport">
<a href="#section-5" class="section-number selfRef">5. </a><a href="#name-http-header-transport" class="section-name selfRef">HTTP Header Transport</a>
</h2>
<div id="execution-context-header-field">
<section id="section-5.1">
<h3 id="name-execution-context-header-fi">
<a href="#section-5.1" class="section-number selfRef">5.1. </a><a href="#name-execution-context-header-fi" class="section-name selfRef">Execution-Context Header Field</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-5.1-1">This specification defines the Execution-Context HTTP header field
<span>[<a href="#RFC9110" class="cite xref">RFC9110</a>]</span> for transporting ECTs between agents.<a href="#section-5.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-5.1-2">The header field value is the ECT in JWS Compact Serialization
format <span>[<a href="#RFC7515" class="cite xref">RFC7515</a>]</span>. The value consists of three Base64url-encoded
parts separated by period (".") characters.<a href="#section-5.1-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-5.1-3">An agent sending a request to another agent includes the
Execution-Context header alongside the WIMSE Workload-Identity
and Workload-Proof-Token headers:<a href="#section-5.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-http-request-with-ect-heade"></span><div id="fig-http-example">
<figure id="figure-5">
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-5.1-4.1">
<pre>
GET /api/safety-check HTTP/1.1
Host: safety-agent.example.com
Workload-Identity: eyJhbGci...WIT...
Workload-Proof-Token: eyJhbGci...WPT...
Execution-Context: eyJhbGci...ECT...
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-5" class="selfRef">Figure 5</a>:
<a href="#name-http-request-with-ect-heade" class="selfRef">HTTP Request with ECT Header</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-5.1-5">When multiple parent tasks contribute context to a single request,
multiple Execution-Context header field lines <span class="bcp14">MAY</span> be included, each
carrying a separate ECT in JWS Compact Serialization format.<a href="#section-5.1-5" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-5.1-6">When a receiver processes multiple Execution-Context headers, it
<span class="bcp14">MUST</span> individually verify each ECT per the procedure in
<a href="#verification" class="auto internal xref">Section 7</a>. If any single ECT fails verification, the
receiver <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> reject the entire request. The set of verified
parent task IDs across all received ECTs represents the complete
set of parent dependencies available for the receiving agent's
subsequent ECT.<a href="#section-5.1-6" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="dag-validation">
<section id="section-6">
<h2 id="name-dag-validation">
<a href="#section-6" class="section-number selfRef">6. </a><a href="#name-dag-validation" class="section-name selfRef">DAG Validation</a>
</h2>
<div id="overview">
<section id="section-6.1">
<h3 id="name-overview">
<a href="#section-6.1" class="section-number selfRef">6.1. </a><a href="#name-overview" class="section-name selfRef">Overview</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-6.1-1">ECTs form a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) where each task
references its parent tasks via the "par" claim. This structure
provides a cryptographically signed record of execution ordering,
enabling auditors to reconstruct the complete workflow and verify
that required predecessor tasks were recorded before dependent
tasks.<a href="#section-6.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="validation-rules">
<section id="section-6.2">
<h3 id="name-validation-rules">
<a href="#section-6.2" class="section-number selfRef">6.2. </a><a href="#name-validation-rules" class="section-name selfRef">Validation Rules</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-6.2-1">When receiving and verifying an ECT, implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> perform
the following DAG validation steps:<a href="#section-6.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="section-6.2-2">
<li id="section-6.2-2.1">
<p id="section-6.2-2.1.1">Task ID Uniqueness: The "tid" claim <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be unique within the
applicable scope (the workflow identified by "wid", or the
entire ledger if "wid" is absent). If a task with the same
"tid" already exists, the ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected.<a href="#section-6.2-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-6.2-2.2">
<p id="section-6.2-2.2.1">Parent Existence: Every task identifier listed in the "par"
array <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> correspond to a task that has been previously
recorded in the ledger. If any parent task is not found, the
ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected.<a href="#section-6.2-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-6.2-2.3">
<p id="section-6.2-2.3.1">Temporal Ordering: The "iat" value of every parent task <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> be greater than the "iat" value of the current task plus a
configurable clock skew tolerance (<span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span>: 30 seconds).
That is, for each parent: <code>parent.iat &lt; child.iat +
clock_skew_tolerance</code>. The tolerance accounts for clock skew
between agents; it does not guarantee strict causal ordering
from timestamps alone. Causal ordering is primarily enforced
by the DAG structure (parent existence in the ledger), not by
timestamps. If any parent task violates this constraint, the
ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected.<a href="#section-6.2-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-6.2-2.4">
<p id="section-6.2-2.4.1">Acyclicity: Following the chain of parent references <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span>
lead back to the current task's "tid". If a cycle is detected,
the ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected.<a href="#section-6.2-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-6.2-2.5">
<p id="section-6.2-2.5.1">Parent Policy Decision: If any parent task has a "pol_decision"
of "rejected" or "pending_human_review", the current task's
"exec_act" <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> indicate a compensation, rollback, remediation,
or human review action. Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> accept an ECT
representing normal workflow continuation when a parent's
"pol_decision" is not "approved", unless the current ECT has
"compensation_required" set to true.<a href="#section-6.2-2.5.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-6.2-2.6">
<p id="section-6.2-2.6.1">Trust Domain Consistency: Parent tasks <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> belong to the
same trust domain or to a trust domain with which a federation
relationship has been established.<a href="#section-6.2-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ol>
</section>
</div>
<div id="dag-validation-algorithm">
<section id="section-6.3">
<h3 id="name-dag-validation-algorithm">
<a href="#section-6.3" class="section-number selfRef">6.3. </a><a href="#name-dag-validation-algorithm" class="section-name selfRef">DAG Validation Algorithm</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-6.3-1">The following pseudocode describes the DAG validation procedure:<a href="#section-6.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-dag-validation-pseudocode"></span><div id="fig-dag-validation">
<figure id="figure-6">
<div class="lang-pseudocode sourcecode" id="section-6.3-2.1">
<pre>
function validate_dag(ect, ledger, clock_skew_tolerance):
// Step 1: Uniqueness check
if ledger.contains(ect.tid, ect.wid):
return error("Task ID already exists in ledger")
// Step 2: Parent existence and temporal ordering
for parent_id in ect.par:
parent = ledger.get(parent_id)
if parent is null:
return error("Parent task not found: " + parent_id)
if parent.iat &gt;= ect.iat + clock_skew_tolerance:
return error("Parent task not earlier than current")
// Step 3: Cycle detection (with traversal limit)
visited = set()
result = has_cycle(ect.tid, ect.par, ledger, visited,
max_ancestor_limit)
if result is error or result is true:
return error("Circular dependency or depth limit exceeded")
return success
function has_cycle(target_tid, parent_ids, ledger, visited,
max_depth):
if visited.size() &gt;= max_depth:
return error("Maximum ancestor traversal limit exceeded")
for parent_id in parent_ids:
if parent_id == target_tid:
return true
if parent_id in visited:
continue
visited.add(parent_id)
parent = ledger.get(parent_id)
if parent is not null:
result = has_cycle(target_tid, parent.par, ledger,
visited, max_depth)
if result is error or result is true:
return result
return false
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-6" class="selfRef">Figure 6</a>:
<a href="#name-dag-validation-pseudocode" class="selfRef">DAG Validation Pseudocode</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-6.3-3">The cycle detection traverses the ancestor graph rooted at the
current task's parents. The complexity is O(V) where V is the
number of ancestor nodes reachable from the current task's parent
references. For typical workflows with shallow DAGs, this is
efficient. To prevent denial-of-service via extremely deep or
wide DAGs, implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> enforce a maximum ancestor
traversal limit (<span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span>: 10000 nodes). If the limit is
reached before cycle detection completes, the ECT <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be
rejected. Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> cache cycle detection results
for previously verified tasks to avoid redundant traversals.<a href="#section-6.3-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="verification">
<section id="section-7">
<h2 id="name-signature-and-token-verific">
<a href="#section-7" class="section-number selfRef">7. </a><a href="#name-signature-and-token-verific" class="section-name selfRef">Signature and Token Verification</a>
</h2>
<div id="verification-procedure">
<section id="section-7.1">
<h3 id="name-verification-procedure">
<a href="#section-7.1" class="section-number selfRef">7.1. </a><a href="#name-verification-procedure" class="section-name selfRef">Verification Procedure</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-7.1-1">When an agent receives an ECT, it <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> perform the following
verification steps in order:<a href="#section-7.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="section-7.1-2">
<li id="section-7.1-2.1">
<p id="section-7.1-2.1.1">Parse the JWS Compact Serialization to extract the JOSE header,
payload, and signature components per <span>[<a href="#RFC7515" class="cite xref">RFC7515</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-7.1-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.2">
<p id="section-7.1-2.2.1">Verify that the "typ" header parameter is "wimse-exec+jwt".<a href="#section-7.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.3">
<p id="section-7.1-2.3.1">Verify that the "alg" header parameter is not "none" and is
not a symmetric algorithm.<a href="#section-7.1-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.4">
<p id="section-7.1-2.4.1">Verify the "kid" header parameter references a known, valid
public key from a WIT within the trust domain.<a href="#section-7.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.5">
<p id="section-7.1-2.5.1">Retrieve the public key identified by "kid" and verify the JWS
signature per <span>[<a href="#RFC7515" class="cite xref">RFC7515</a>]</span> Section 5.2.<a href="#section-7.1-2.5.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.6">
<p id="section-7.1-2.6.1">Verify that the signing key identified by "kid" has not been
revoked within the trust domain. Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> check
the key's revocation status using the trust domain's key
lifecycle mechanism (e.g., certificate revocation list, OCSP,
or SPIFFE trust bundle updates).<a href="#section-7.1-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.7">
<p id="section-7.1-2.7.1">Verify the "alg" header parameter matches the algorithm in the
corresponding WIT.<a href="#section-7.1-2.7.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.8">
<p id="section-7.1-2.8.1">Verify the "iss" claim matches the "sub" claim of the WIT
associated with the "kid" public key.<a href="#section-7.1-2.8.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.9">
<p id="section-7.1-2.9.1">Verify the "aud" claim contains the verifier's own workload
identity. When "aud" is an array, it is sufficient that the
verifier's identity appears as one element; the presence of
other audience values does not cause verification failure.
When the verifier is the audit ledger, the ledger's own
identity <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> appear in "aud".<a href="#section-7.1-2.9.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.10">
<p id="section-7.1-2.10.1">Verify the "exp" claim indicates the ECT has not expired.<a href="#section-7.1-2.10.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.11">
<p id="section-7.1-2.11.1">Verify the "iat" claim is not unreasonably far in the past
(implementation-specific threshold, <span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span> maximum of
15 minutes) and is not unreasonably far in the future
(<span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span>: no more than 30 seconds ahead of the
verifier's current time, to account for clock skew).<a href="#section-7.1-2.11.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.12">
<p id="section-7.1-2.12.1">Verify all required claims ("jti", "tid", "exec_act", "par",
"pol", "pol_decision") are present and well-formed.<a href="#section-7.1-2.12.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.13">
<p id="section-7.1-2.13.1">Verify "pol_decision" is one of "approved", "rejected", or
"pending_human_review".<a href="#section-7.1-2.13.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.14">
<p id="section-7.1-2.14.1">Perform DAG validation per <a href="#dag-validation" class="auto internal xref">Section 6</a>.<a href="#section-7.1-2.14.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-7.1-2.15">
<p id="section-7.1-2.15.1">If all checks pass, the ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be appended to the audit
ledger.<a href="#section-7.1-2.15.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ol>
<p id="section-7.1-3">If any verification step fails, the ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected and the
failure <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be logged for audit purposes. Error messages
<span class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</span> reveal whether specific parent task IDs exist in the
ledger, to prevent information disclosure.<a href="#section-7.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-7.1-4">When ECT verification fails during HTTP request processing, the
receiving agent <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> respond with HTTP 403 (Forbidden) if the
WIT and WPT are valid but the ECT is invalid, and HTTP 401
(Unauthorized) if the ECT signature verification fails. The
response body <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> include a generic error indicator without
revealing which specific verification step failed. The receiving
agent <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> process the requested action when ECT verification
fails.<a href="#section-7.1-4" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="verification-pseudocode">
<section id="section-7.2">
<h3 id="name-verification-pseudocode">
<a href="#section-7.2" class="section-number selfRef">7.2. </a><a href="#name-verification-pseudocode" class="section-name selfRef">Verification Pseudocode</a>
</h3>
<span id="name-ect-verification-pseudocode"></span><div id="fig-verification">
<figure id="figure-7">
<div class="breakable lang-pseudocode sourcecode" id="section-7.2-1.1">
<pre>
function verify_ect(ect_jws, verifier_id,
trust_domain_keys, ledger):
// Parse JWS
(header, payload, signature) = parse_jws(ect_jws)
// Verify header
if header.typ != "wimse-exec+jwt":
return reject("Invalid typ parameter")
if header.alg == "none" or is_symmetric(header.alg):
return reject("Prohibited algorithm")
// Look up public key
public_key = trust_domain_keys.get(header.kid)
if public_key is null:
return reject("Unknown key identifier")
// Verify signature
if not verify_jws_signature(header, payload,
signature, public_key):
return reject("Invalid signature")
// Verify key not revoked
if is_key_revoked(header.kid, trust_domain_keys):
return reject("Signing key has been revoked")
// Verify algorithm alignment
wit = get_wit_for_key(header.kid)
if header.alg != wit.alg:
return reject("Algorithm mismatch with WIT")
// Verify issuer matches WIT subject
if payload.iss != wit.sub:
return reject("Issuer does not match WIT subject")
// Verify audience
if verifier_id not in payload.aud:
return reject("ECT not intended for this recipient")
// Verify not expired
if payload.exp &lt; current_time():
return reject("ECT has expired")
// Verify iat freshness (not too old, not in the future)
if payload.iat &lt; current_time() - max_age_threshold:
return reject("ECT issued too long ago")
if payload.iat &gt; current_time() + clock_skew_tolerance:
return reject("ECT issued in the future")
// Verify required claims
for claim in ["jti", "tid", "exec_act", "par",
"pol", "pol_decision"]:
if claim not in payload:
return reject("Missing required claim: " + claim)
// Validate pol_decision value
if payload.pol_decision not in
["approved", "rejected", "pending_human_review"]:
return reject("Invalid pol_decision value")
// Validate DAG
result = validate_dag(payload, ledger,
clock_skew_tolerance)
if result is error:
return reject("DAG validation failed")
// All checks passed; append to ledger
ledger.append(payload)
return accept
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-7" class="selfRef">Figure 7</a>:
<a href="#name-ect-verification-pseudocode" class="selfRef">ECT Verification Pseudocode</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="ledger-interface">
<section id="section-8">
<h2 id="name-audit-ledger-interface">
<a href="#section-8" class="section-number selfRef">8. </a><a href="#name-audit-ledger-interface" class="section-name selfRef">Audit Ledger Interface</a>
</h2>
<div id="overview-1">
<section id="section-8.1">
<h3 id="name-overview-2">
<a href="#section-8.1" class="section-number selfRef">8.1. </a><a href="#name-overview-2" class="section-name selfRef">Overview</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-8.1-1">ECTs are designed to be recorded in an immutable audit ledger for
compliance verification and post-hoc analysis. This specification
defines the logical interface for the ledger but does not mandate
a specific storage technology. Implementations <span class="bcp14">MAY</span> use
append-only logs, databases with cryptographic commitment schemes,
distributed ledgers, or any storage mechanism that provides the
required properties.<a href="#section-8.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="required-properties">
<section id="section-8.2">
<h3 id="name-required-properties">
<a href="#section-8.2" class="section-number selfRef">8.2. </a><a href="#name-required-properties" class="section-name selfRef">Required Properties</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-8.2-1">An audit ledger implementation <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> provide:<a href="#section-8.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="section-8.2-2">
<li id="section-8.2-2.1">
<p id="section-8.2-2.1.1">Append-only semantics: Once an ECT is recorded, it <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span> be
modified or deleted.<a href="#section-8.2-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-8.2-2.2">
<p id="section-8.2-2.2.1">Ordering: The ledger <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> maintain a total ordering of ECT
entries via a monotonically increasing sequence number.<a href="#section-8.2-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-8.2-2.3">
<p id="section-8.2-2.3.1">Lookup by task ID: The ledger <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> support efficient retrieval
of ECT entries by "tid" value.<a href="#section-8.2-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="section-8.2-2.4">
<p id="section-8.2-2.4.1">Integrity verification: The ledger <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> provide a mechanism
to verify that no entries have been tampered with (e.g.,
hash chains or Merkle trees).<a href="#section-8.2-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ol>
<p id="section-8.2-3">The ledger <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be maintained by an entity independent of the
workflow agents to reduce the risk of collusion.<a href="#section-8.2-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="ledger-entry-structure">
<section id="section-8.3">
<h3 id="name-ledger-entry-structure">
<a href="#section-8.3" class="section-number selfRef">8.3. </a><a href="#name-ledger-entry-structure" class="section-name selfRef">Ledger Entry Structure</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-8.3-1">Each ledger entry is a logical record containing:<a href="#section-8.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-ledger-entry-example"></span><div id="fig-ledger-entry">
<figure id="figure-8">
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="section-8.3-2.1">
<pre>
{
"ledger_sequence": 42,
"task_id": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440001",
"agent_id": "spiffe://example.com/agent/clinical",
"action": "recommend_treatment",
"parents": [],
"ect_jws": "eyJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIs...&lt;complete JWS&gt;",
"signature_verified": true,
"verification_timestamp": "2026-02-24T15:42:31.000Z",
"stored_timestamp": "2026-02-24T15:42:31.050Z"
}
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-8" class="selfRef">Figure 8</a>:
<a href="#name-ledger-entry-example" class="selfRef">Ledger Entry Example</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-8.3-3">The "ect_jws" field contains the full JWS Compact Serialization
and is the authoritative record. The other fields ("agent_id",
"action", "parents") are convenience indexes derived from the
ECT payload; if they disagree with the JWS payload, the JWS
payload takes precedence. Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> validate that
convenience index fields match the corresponding values in the
JWS payload at write time to prevent desynchronization between
the authoritative JWS and the indexed fields.<a href="#section-8.3-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="use-cases">
<section id="section-9">
<h2 id="name-use-cases">
<a href="#section-9" class="section-number selfRef">9. </a><a href="#name-use-cases" class="section-name selfRef">Use Cases</a>
</h2>
<p id="section-9-1">This section describes representative use cases demonstrating how
ECTs provide execution records in regulated environments. These
examples demonstrate ECT mechanics; production deployments would
include additional domain-specific requirements beyond the scope
of this specification.<a href="#section-9-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-9-2">Note: task identifiers in this section are abbreviated for
readability. In production, all "tid" values are required to be
UUIDs per <a href="#exec-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.2</a>.<a href="#section-9-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div id="medical-device-sdlc-workflow">
<section id="section-9.1">
<h3 id="name-medical-device-sdlc-workflo">
<a href="#section-9.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.1. </a><a href="#name-medical-device-sdlc-workflo" class="section-name selfRef">Medical Device SDLC Workflow</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-9.1-1">In a medical device software development lifecycle (SDLC),
AI agents assist across multiple phases from requirements
analysis through release approval. Regulatory frameworks
including <span>[<a href="#FDA-21CFR11" class="cite xref">FDA-21CFR11</a>]</span> Section 11.10(e) and <span>[<a href="#EU-MDR" class="cite xref">EU-MDR</a>]</span> require
audit trails documenting the complete development process for
software used in medical devices.<a href="#section-9.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-medical-device-sdlc-workflow"></span><div id="fig-medtech-sdlc">
<figure id="figure-9">
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.1-2.1">
<pre>
Agent A (Spec Reviewer):
tid: task-001 par: []
exec_act: review_requirements_spec
pol: spec_review_policy_v2 pol_decision: approved
Agent B (Code Generator):
tid: task-002 par: [task-001]
exec_act: implement_module
pol: coding_standards_v3 pol_decision: approved
Agent C (Test Agent):
tid: task-003 par: [task-002]
exec_act: execute_test_suite
pol: test_coverage_policy_v1 pol_decision: approved
Agent D (Build Agent):
tid: task-004 par: [task-003]
exec_act: build_release_artifact
pol: build_validation_v2 pol_decision: approved
Human Release Manager:
tid: task-005 par: [task-004]
exec_act: approve_release
pol: release_approval_policy pol_decision: approved
pol_enforcer: spiffe://meddev.example/human/release-mgr-42
witnessed_by: [spiffe://meddev.example/audit/qa-observer-1]
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-9" class="selfRef">Figure 9</a>:
<a href="#name-medical-device-sdlc-workflow" class="selfRef">Medical Device SDLC Workflow</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-9.1-3">ECTs record that requirements were reviewed before implementation
began, that tests were executed against the implemented code, that
the build artifact was validated, and that a human release manager
explicitly approved the release. The DAG structure ensures no
phase was skipped or reordered.<a href="#section-9.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div id="fda-audit-with-dag-reconstruction">
<section id="section-9.1.1">
<h4 id="name-fda-audit-with-dag-reconstr">
<a href="#section-9.1.1" class="section-number selfRef">9.1.1. </a><a href="#name-fda-audit-with-dag-reconstr" class="section-name selfRef">FDA Audit with DAG Reconstruction</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-9.1.1-1">During a regulatory audit, an FDA reviewer requests evidence of
the development process for a specific software release. The
auditing authority retrieves all ECTs sharing the same workflow
identifier ("wid") from the audit ledger and reconstructs the
complete DAG:<a href="#section-9.1.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-reconstructed-dag-for-fda-a"></span><div id="fig-fda-audit">
<figure id="figure-10">
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.1.1-2.1">
<pre>
task-001 (review_requirements_spec)
|
v
task-002 (implement_module)
|
v
task-003 (execute_test_suite)
|
v
task-004 (build_release_artifact)
|
v
task-005 (approve_release) [human, witnessed]
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-10" class="selfRef">Figure 10</a>:
<a href="#name-reconstructed-dag-for-fda-a" class="selfRef">Reconstructed DAG for FDA Audit</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-9.1.1-3">The reconstructed DAG provides cryptographic evidence that:<a href="#section-9.1.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-4.1">
<p id="section-9.1.1-4.1.1">Each phase was executed by an identified and authenticated agent.<a href="#section-9.1.1-4.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-4.2">
<p id="section-9.1.1-4.2.1">Policy checkpoints were evaluated at every phase transition.<a href="#section-9.1.1-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-4.3">
<p id="section-9.1.1-4.3.1">The execution sequence was maintained (no step was bypassed).<a href="#section-9.1.1-4.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-4.4">
<p id="section-9.1.1-4.4.1">A human-in-the-loop approved the final release, with independent
witness attestation.<a href="#section-9.1.1-4.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-4.5">
<p id="section-9.1.1-4.5.1">Timestamps and execution durations are recorded for each step.<a href="#section-9.1.1-4.5.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-9.1.1-5">This can contribute to compliance with:<a href="#section-9.1.1-5" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-6.1">
<p id="section-9.1.1-6.1.1"><span>[<a href="#FDA-21CFR11" class="cite xref">FDA-21CFR11</a>]</span> Section 11.10(e): Computer-generated audit trails
that record the date, time, and identity of the operator.<a href="#section-9.1.1-6.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-6.2">
<p id="section-9.1.1-6.2.1"><span>[<a href="#EU-MDR" class="cite xref">EU-MDR</a>]</span> Annex II: Technical documentation traceability for the
software development lifecycle.<a href="#section-9.1.1-6.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-6.3">
<p id="section-9.1.1-6.3.1"><span>[<a href="#EU-AI-ACT" class="cite xref">EU-AI-ACT</a>]</span> Article 12: Automatic logging capabilities for
high-risk AI systems involved in the development process.<a href="#section-9.1.1-6.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.1.1-6.4">
<p id="section-9.1.1-6.4.1"><span>[<a href="#EU-AI-ACT" class="cite xref">EU-AI-ACT</a>]</span> Article 14: ECTs can record evidence that human
oversight events occurred during the release process.<a href="#section-9.1.1-6.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="financial-trading-workflow">
<section id="section-9.2">
<h3 id="name-financial-trading-workflow">
<a href="#section-9.2" class="section-number selfRef">9.2. </a><a href="#name-financial-trading-workflow" class="section-name selfRef">Financial Trading Workflow</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-9.2-1">In a financial trading workflow, agents perform risk assessment,
compliance verification, and trade execution. The DAG structure
records that compliance checks were evaluated before trade
execution.<a href="#section-9.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-financial-trading-workflow-2"></span><div id="fig-finance">
<figure id="figure-11">
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.2-2.1">
<pre>
Agent A (Risk Assessment):
tid: task-001 par: []
exec_act: calculate_risk_exposure
pol: risk_limits_policy_v2 pol_decision: approved
Agent B (Compliance):
tid: task-002 par: [task-001]
exec_act: verify_compliance
pol: compliance_check_v1 pol_decision: approved
Agent C (Execution):
tid: task-003 par: [task-002]
exec_act: execute_trade
pol: execution_policy_v3 pol_decision: approved
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-11" class="selfRef">Figure 11</a>:
<a href="#name-financial-trading-workflow-2" class="selfRef">Financial Trading Workflow</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-9.2-3">This can contribute to compliance with:<a href="#section-9.2-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-9.2-4.1">
<p id="section-9.2-4.1.1"><span>[<a href="#MIFID-II" class="cite xref">MIFID-II</a>]</span>: ECTs provide cryptographic records of the execution
sequence that can support transaction audit requirements.<a href="#section-9.2-4.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.2-4.2">
<p id="section-9.2-4.2.1"><span>[<a href="#DORA" class="cite xref">DORA</a>]</span> Article 12: ECTs contribute to ICT activity logging.<a href="#section-9.2-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-9.2-4.3">
<p id="section-9.2-4.3.1"><span>[<a href="#EU-AI-ACT" class="cite xref">EU-AI-ACT</a>]</span> Article 12: Logging of decisions made by AI-driven
systems.<a href="#section-9.2-4.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="compensation-and-rollback">
<section id="section-9.3">
<h3 id="name-compensation-and-rollback">
<a href="#section-9.3" class="section-number selfRef">9.3. </a><a href="#name-compensation-and-rollback" class="section-name selfRef">Compensation and Rollback</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-9.3-1">When a compliance violation is discovered after execution, ECTs
provide a mechanism to record authorized compensation actions with
a cryptographic link to the original task:<a href="#section-9.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-compensation-ect-example"></span><div id="fig-compensation">
<figure id="figure-12">
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="section-9.3-2.1">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://bank.example/agent/operations",
"sub": "spiffe://bank.example/agent/operations",
"aud": "spiffe://bank.example/system/ledger",
"iat": 1772150550,
"exp": 1772151150,
"wid": "d3e4f5a6-b7c8-9012-def0-123456789012",
"tid": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440099",
"exec_act": "initiate_trade_rollback",
"par": ["550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440003"],
"pol": "compensation_policy_v1",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"pol_enforcer": "spiffe://bank.example/human/compliance-officer",
"compensation_required": true,
"compensation_reason": "policy_violation_in_parent_trade"
}
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-12" class="selfRef">Figure 12</a>:
<a href="#name-compensation-ect-example" class="selfRef">Compensation ECT Example</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-9.3-3">The "par" claim links the compensation action to the original
trade, creating an auditable chain from execution through
violation discovery to remediation.<a href="#section-9.3-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="autonomous-logistics-coordination">
<section id="section-9.4">
<h3 id="name-autonomous-logistics-coordi">
<a href="#section-9.4" class="section-number selfRef">9.4. </a><a href="#name-autonomous-logistics-coordi" class="section-name selfRef">Autonomous Logistics Coordination</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-9.4-1">In a logistics workflow, multiple compliance checks complete
before shipment commitment. The DAG structure records that all
required checks were completed:<a href="#section-9.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-logistics-workflow-with-par"></span><div id="fig-logistics">
<figure id="figure-13">
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="section-9.4-2.1">
<pre>
Agent A (Route Planning):
tid: task-001 par: []
exec_act: plan_route
pol: route_policy_v1 pol_decision: approved
Agent B (Customs):
tid: task-002 par: [task-001]
exec_act: validate_customs
pol: customs_policy_v2 pol_decision: approved
Agent C (Safety):
tid: task-003 par: [task-001]
exec_act: verify_cargo_safety
pol: safety_policy_v1 pol_decision: approved
Agent D (Payment):
tid: task-004 par: [task-002, task-003]
exec_act: authorize_payment
pol: payment_policy_v3 pol_decision: approved
System (Commitment):
tid: task-005 par: [task-004]
exec_act: commit_shipment
pol: commitment_policy_v1 pol_decision: approved
</pre>
</div>
<figcaption><a href="#figure-13" class="selfRef">Figure 13</a>:
<a href="#name-logistics-workflow-with-par" class="selfRef">Logistics Workflow with Parallel Tasks</a>
</figcaption></figure>
</div>
<p id="section-9.4-3">Note that tasks 002 and 003 both depend only on task-001 and can
execute in parallel. Task 004 depends on both, demonstrating the
DAG's ability to represent parallel execution with a join point.<a href="#section-9.4-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="security-considerations">
<section id="section-10">
<h2 id="name-security-considerations">
<a href="#section-10" class="section-number selfRef">10. </a><a href="#name-security-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">Security Considerations</a>
</h2>
<p id="section-10-1">This section addresses security considerations following the
guidance in <span>[<a href="#RFC3552" class="cite xref">RFC3552</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-10-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div id="threat-model">
<section id="section-10.1">
<h3 id="name-threat-model">
<a href="#section-10.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.1. </a><a href="#name-threat-model" class="section-name selfRef">Threat Model</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.1-1">The following threat actors are considered:<a href="#section-10.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.1-2.1">
<p id="section-10.1-2.1.1">Malicious agent (insider threat): An agent within the trust
domain that intentionally creates false ECT claims.<a href="#section-10.1-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.1-2.2">
<p id="section-10.1-2.2.1">Compromised agent (external attacker): An agent whose private
key has been obtained by an external attacker.<a href="#section-10.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.1-2.3">
<p id="section-10.1-2.3.1">Ledger tamperer: An entity attempting to modify or delete ledger
entries after they have been recorded.<a href="#section-10.1-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.1-2.4">
<p id="section-10.1-2.4.1">Time manipulator: An entity attempting to manipulate timestamps
to alter perceived execution ordering.<a href="#section-10.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="self-assertion-limitation">
<section id="section-10.2">
<h3 id="name-self-assertion-limitation">
<a href="#section-10.2" class="section-number selfRef">10.2. </a><a href="#name-self-assertion-limitation" class="section-name selfRef">Self-Assertion Limitation</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.2-1">ECTs are self-asserted by the executing agent. The agent claims
what it did, and this claim is signed with its private key. A
compromised or malicious agent could create ECTs with false claims
(e.g., setting "pol_decision" to "approved" without actually
evaluating the policy).<a href="#section-10.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.2-2">ECTs do not independently verify that:<a href="#section-10.2-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2-3.1">
<p id="section-10.2-3.1.1">The claimed execution actually occurred as described<a href="#section-10.2-3.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2-3.2">
<p id="section-10.2-3.2.1">The policy evaluation was correctly performed<a href="#section-10.2-3.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2-3.3">
<p id="section-10.2-3.3.1">The input/output hashes correspond to the actual data processed<a href="#section-10.2-3.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2-3.4">
<p id="section-10.2-3.4.1">The agent faithfully performed the stated action<a href="#section-10.2-3.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-10.2-4">The trustworthiness of ECT claims depends on the trustworthiness
of the signing agent. To mitigate single-agent false claims,
regulated environments <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use the "witnessed_by" mechanism
to include independent third-party observers at critical decision
points. However, the "witnessed_by" claim is self-asserted by
the ECT issuer: the listed witnesses do not co-sign the ECT and
there is no cryptographic proof within a single ECT that the
witnesses actually observed the task. An issuing agent could
list witnesses that did not participate.<a href="#section-10.2-4" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div id="witness-attestation-model">
<section id="section-10.2.1">
<h4 id="name-witness-attestation-model">
<a href="#section-10.2.1" class="section-number selfRef">10.2.1. </a><a href="#name-witness-attestation-model" class="section-name selfRef">Witness Attestation Model</a>
</h4>
<p id="section-10.2.1-1">To address the self-assertion limitation of the "witnessed_by"
claim, witnesses <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> submit their own independent signed ECTs
to the audit ledger attesting to the observed task. A witness
attestation ECT:<a href="#section-10.2.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2.1-2.1">
<p id="section-10.2.1-2.1.1"><span class="bcp14">MUST</span> set "iss" to the witness's own workload identity.<a href="#section-10.2.1-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2.1-2.2">
<p id="section-10.2.1-2.2.1"><span class="bcp14">MUST</span> set "exec_act" to "witness_attestation" (or a domain-
specific equivalent).<a href="#section-10.2.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2.1-2.3">
<p id="section-10.2.1-2.3.1"><span class="bcp14">MUST</span> include the observed task's "tid" in the "par" array,
linking the attestation to the original task.<a href="#section-10.2.1-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.2.1-2.4">
<p id="section-10.2.1-2.4.1"><span class="bcp14">MUST</span> set "pol_decision" to "approved" to indicate the witness
confirms the observation.<a href="#section-10.2.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-10.2.1-3">When a task's "witnessed_by" claim lists one or more witnesses,
auditors <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> verify that corresponding witness attestation
ECTs exist in the ledger for each listed witness. A mismatch
between the "witnessed_by" list and the set of independent witness
ECTs in the ledger <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be flagged during audit review.<a href="#section-10.2.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.2.1-4">This model converts witness attestation from a self-asserted claim
to a cryptographically verifiable property of the ledger: the
witness independently signs their own ECT using their own key,
and the ledger records both the original task ECT and the witness
attestation ECTs.<a href="#section-10.2.1-4" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="organizational-prerequisites">
<section id="section-10.3">
<h3 id="name-organizational-prerequisite">
<a href="#section-10.3" class="section-number selfRef">10.3. </a><a href="#name-organizational-prerequisite" class="section-name selfRef">Organizational Prerequisites</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.3-1">ECTs operate within a broader trust framework. The guarantees
provided by ECTs are only meaningful when the following
organizational controls are in place:<a href="#section-10.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.3-2.1">
<p id="section-10.3-2.1.1">Key management governance: Controls over who provisions agent
keys and how keys are protected.<a href="#section-10.3-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.3-2.2">
<p id="section-10.3-2.2.1">Ledger integrity governance: The ledger is maintained by an
entity independent of the workflow agents.<a href="#section-10.3-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.3-2.3">
<p id="section-10.3-2.3.1">Policy lifecycle management: Policy identifiers in ECTs map to
actual, validated policy rules.<a href="#section-10.3-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.3-2.4">
<p id="section-10.3-2.4.1">Agent deployment governance: Agents are deployed and maintained
in a manner that preserves their integrity.<a href="#section-10.3-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="signature-verification">
<section id="section-10.4">
<h3 id="name-signature-verification">
<a href="#section-10.4" class="section-number selfRef">10.4. </a><a href="#name-signature-verification" class="section-name selfRef">Signature Verification</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.4-1">ECTs <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be signed with the agent's private key using JWS
<span>[<a href="#RFC7515" class="cite xref">RFC7515</a>]</span>. The signature algorithm <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> match the algorithm
specified in the agent's WIT. Receivers <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> verify the ECT
signature against the WIT public key before processing any
claims. Receivers <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> verify that the signing key has not been
revoked within the trust domain (see step 6 in
<a href="#verification" class="auto internal xref">Section 7</a>).<a href="#section-10.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.4-2">If signature verification fails or if the signing key has been
revoked, the ECT <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected entirely and the failure <span class="bcp14">MUST</span>
be logged.<a href="#section-10.4-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.4-3">Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> use established JWS libraries and <span class="bcp14">MUST NOT</span>
implement custom signature verification.<a href="#section-10.4-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="replay-attack-prevention">
<section id="section-10.5">
<h3 id="name-replay-attack-prevention">
<a href="#section-10.5" class="section-number selfRef">10.5. </a><a href="#name-replay-attack-prevention" class="section-name selfRef">Replay Attack Prevention</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.5-1">ECTs include short expiration times (<span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span>: 5-15 minutes) to
limit the window for replay attacks. The "aud" claim restricts
replay to unintended recipients: an ECT intended for Agent B
will be rejected by Agent C. The "iat" claim enables receivers to
reject ECTs that are too old, even if not yet expired.<a href="#section-10.5-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.5-2">The DAG structure provides additional replay protection: an ECT
referencing parent tasks that already have a recorded child task
with the same action can be flagged as a potential replay.<a href="#section-10.5-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.5-3">Implementations <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> maintain a cache of recently-seen "jti"
values to detect replayed ECTs within the expiration window.
An ECT with a duplicate "jti" value <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be rejected.<a href="#section-10.5-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="man-in-the-middle-protection">
<section id="section-10.6">
<h3 id="name-man-in-the-middle-protectio">
<a href="#section-10.6" class="section-number selfRef">10.6. </a><a href="#name-man-in-the-middle-protectio" class="section-name selfRef">Man-in-the-Middle Protection</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.6-1">ECTs do not replace transport-layer security. ECTs <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> be
transmitted over TLS or mTLS connections. When used with the WIMSE
service-to-service protocol <span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol</a>]</span>,
transport security is already established. HTTP Message Signatures
<span>[<a href="#RFC9421" class="cite xref">RFC9421</a>]</span> provide an alternative channel binding mechanism.<a href="#section-10.6-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.6-2">The defense-in-depth model provides:<a href="#section-10.6-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.6-3.1">
<p id="section-10.6-3.1.1">TLS/mTLS (transport layer): Prevents network-level tampering.<a href="#section-10.6-3.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.6-3.2">
<p id="section-10.6-3.2.1">WIT/WPT (WIMSE identity layer): Proves agent identity and
request authorization.<a href="#section-10.6-3.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.6-3.3">
<p id="section-10.6-3.3.1">ECT (execution accountability layer): Records what the agent did
and under what policy.<a href="#section-10.6-3.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="key-compromise">
<section id="section-10.7">
<h3 id="name-key-compromise">
<a href="#section-10.7" class="section-number selfRef">10.7. </a><a href="#name-key-compromise" class="section-name selfRef">Key Compromise</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.7-1">If an agent's private key is compromised, an attacker can forge
ECTs that appear to originate from that agent. To mitigate this
risk:<a href="#section-10.7-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.7-2.1">
<p id="section-10.7-2.1.1">Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use short-lived keys and rotate them
frequently (hours to days, not months).<a href="#section-10.7-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.7-2.2">
<p id="section-10.7-2.2.1">Private keys <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be stored in Hardware Security Modules (HSMs)
or equivalent secure key storage.<a href="#section-10.7-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.7-2.3">
<p id="section-10.7-2.3.1">Trust domains <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> support rapid key revocation.<a href="#section-10.7-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.7-2.4">
<p id="section-10.7-2.4.1">Upon suspected compromise, the trust domain <span class="bcp14">MUST</span> revoke the
compromised key and issue a new WIT with a fresh key pair.<a href="#section-10.7-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-10.7-3">ECTs signed with a compromised key that were recorded in the
ledger before revocation remain valid historical records but <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span>
be flagged in the ledger as "signed with subsequently revoked key"
for audit purposes.<a href="#section-10.7-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="collusion-and-false-claims">
<section id="section-10.8">
<h3 id="name-collusion-and-false-claims">
<a href="#section-10.8" class="section-number selfRef">10.8. </a><a href="#name-collusion-and-false-claims" class="section-name selfRef">Collusion and False Claims</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.8-1">A single malicious agent cannot forge parent task references
because DAG validation requires parent tasks to exist in the
ledger. However, multiple colluding agents could potentially
create a false execution history if they control the ledger.<a href="#section-10.8-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.8-2">Mitigations include:<a href="#section-10.8-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-10.8-3.1">
<p id="section-10.8-3.1.1">Independent ledger maintenance: The ledger <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be maintained
by an entity independent of the workflow agents.<a href="#section-10.8-3.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.8-3.2">
<p id="section-10.8-3.2.1">Witness attestation: Using the "witnessed_by" claim to include
independent third-party observers.<a href="#section-10.8-3.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.8-3.3">
<p id="section-10.8-3.3.1">Cross-verification: Multiple independent ledger replicas can be
compared for consistency.<a href="#section-10.8-3.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-10.8-3.4">
<p id="section-10.8-3.4.1">Out-of-band audit: External auditors periodically verify ledger
contents against expected workflow patterns.<a href="#section-10.8-3.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="denial-of-service">
<section id="section-10.9">
<h3 id="name-denial-of-service">
<a href="#section-10.9" class="section-number selfRef">10.9. </a><a href="#name-denial-of-service" class="section-name selfRef">Denial of Service</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.9-1">ECT signature verification is computationally inexpensive
(approximately 1ms per ECT on modern hardware for ES256). DAG
validation complexity is O(V) where V is the number of ancestor
nodes reachable from the parent references; for typical shallow
DAGs this is efficient.<a href="#section-10.9-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.9-2">Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> apply rate limiting at the API layer to
prevent excessive ECT submissions. DAG validation <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be
performed after signature verification to avoid wasting resources
on unsigned or incorrectly signed tokens.<a href="#section-10.9-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="timestamp-accuracy">
<section id="section-10.10">
<h3 id="name-timestamp-accuracy">
<a href="#section-10.10" class="section-number selfRef">10.10. </a><a href="#name-timestamp-accuracy" class="section-name selfRef">Timestamp Accuracy</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.10-1">ECTs rely on timestamps ("iat", "exp") for temporal ordering.
Clock skew between agents can lead to incorrect ordering
judgments. Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use synchronized time sources
(e.g., NTP) and <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> allow a configurable clock skew tolerance
(<span class="bcp14">RECOMMENDED</span>: 30 seconds).<a href="#section-10.10-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.10-2">Cross-organizational deployments where agents span multiple trust
domains with independent time sources <span class="bcp14">MAY</span> require a higher clock
skew tolerance. Deployments using trust domain federation <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span>
document their configured clock skew tolerance value and <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span>
ensure all participating trust domains agree on a common tolerance.<a href="#section-10.10-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-10.10-3">The temporal ordering check in DAG validation incorporates the
clock skew tolerance to account for minor clock differences
between agents.<a href="#section-10.10-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="ect-size-constraints">
<section id="section-10.11">
<h3 id="name-ect-size-constraints">
<a href="#section-10.11" class="section-number selfRef">10.11. </a><a href="#name-ect-size-constraints" class="section-name selfRef">ECT Size Constraints</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-10.11-1">ECTs with many parent tasks or large extension objects can
increase HTTP header size. Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> limit the "par"
array to a maximum of 256 entries. Workflows requiring more
parent references <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> introduce intermediate aggregation
tasks. The "ext" object <span class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</span> exceed 4096 bytes when
serialized as JSON and <span class="bcp14">SHOULD NOT</span> exceed a nesting depth of
5 levels (see also <a href="#extension-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.8</a>).<a href="#section-10.11-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="privacy-considerations">
<section id="section-11">
<h2 id="name-privacy-considerations">
<a href="#section-11" class="section-number selfRef">11. </a><a href="#name-privacy-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">Privacy Considerations</a>
</h2>
<div id="data-exposure-in-ects">
<section id="section-11.1">
<h3 id="name-data-exposure-in-ects">
<a href="#section-11.1" class="section-number selfRef">11.1. </a><a href="#name-data-exposure-in-ects" class="section-name selfRef">Data Exposure in ECTs</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-11.1-1">ECTs necessarily reveal:<a href="#section-11.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-2.1">
<p id="section-11.1-2.1.1">Agent identities ("iss", "aud") for accountability purposes<a href="#section-11.1-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-2.2">
<p id="section-11.1-2.2.1">Action descriptions ("exec_act") for audit trail completeness<a href="#section-11.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-2.3">
<p id="section-11.1-2.3.1">Policy evaluation outcomes ("pol", "pol_decision") for
compliance verification<a href="#section-11.1-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-2.4">
<p id="section-11.1-2.4.1">Timestamps ("iat", "exp") for temporal ordering<a href="#section-11.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p id="section-11.1-3">ECTs are designed to NOT reveal:<a href="#section-11.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-4.1">
<p id="section-11.1-4.1.1">Actual input or output data values (replaced with cryptographic
hashes via "inp_hash" and "out_hash")<a href="#section-11.1-4.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-4.2">
<p id="section-11.1-4.2.1">Internal computation details or intermediate steps<a href="#section-11.1-4.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-4.3">
<p id="section-11.1-4.3.1">Proprietary algorithms or intellectual property<a href="#section-11.1-4.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="section-11.1-4.4">
<p id="section-11.1-4.4.1">Personally identifiable information (PII)<a href="#section-11.1-4.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="data-minimization">
<section id="section-11.2">
<h3 id="name-data-minimization">
<a href="#section-11.2" class="section-number selfRef">11.2. </a><a href="#name-data-minimization" class="section-name selfRef">Data Minimization</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-11.2-1">Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> minimize the information included in ECTs.
The "exec_act" claim <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use structured identifiers (e.g.,
"process_payment") rather than natural language descriptions.
The "pol" claim <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> reference policy identifiers rather than
embedding policy content.<a href="#section-11.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-11.2-2">The "compensation_reason" claim (<a href="#compensation-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.7</a>)
deserves particular attention: because it is human-readable and
may describe the circumstances of a failure or policy violation,
it risks exposing sensitive operational details. Implementations
<span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> use short, structured reason codes (e.g.,
"policy_violation_in_parent_trade") rather than free-form
natural language explanations. Implementers <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> review
"compensation_reason" values for potential information leakage
before deploying to production.<a href="#section-11.2-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="storage-and-access-control">
<section id="section-11.3">
<h3 id="name-storage-and-access-control">
<a href="#section-11.3" class="section-number selfRef">11.3. </a><a href="#name-storage-and-access-control" class="section-name selfRef">Storage and Access Control</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-11.3-1">ECTs stored in audit ledgers <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be access-controlled so that
only authorized auditors and regulators can read them.
Implementations <span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> consider encryption at rest for ledger
storage containing sensitive regulatory data.<a href="#section-11.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-11.3-2">Full input and output data (corresponding to the hashes in ECTs)
<span class="bcp14">SHOULD</span> be stored separately from the ledger with additional access
controls, since auditors may need to verify hash correctness but
general access to the data values is not needed.<a href="#section-11.3-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="regulatory-access">
<section id="section-11.4">
<h3 id="name-regulatory-access">
<a href="#section-11.4" class="section-number selfRef">11.4. </a><a href="#name-regulatory-access" class="section-name selfRef">Regulatory Access</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-11.4-1">ECTs are designed for interpretation by qualified human auditors
and regulators. ECTs provide structural records of execution
ordering and policy evaluation; they are not intended for public
disclosure.<a href="#section-11.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="iana-considerations">
<section id="section-12">
<h2 id="name-iana-considerations">
<a href="#section-12" class="section-number selfRef">12. </a><a href="#name-iana-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">IANA Considerations</a>
</h2>
<div id="media-type-registration">
<section id="section-12.1">
<h3 id="name-media-type-registration">
<a href="#section-12.1" class="section-number selfRef">12.1. </a><a href="#name-media-type-registration" class="section-name selfRef">Media Type Registration</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-12.1-1">This document requests registration of the following media type
in the "Media Types" registry maintained by IANA:<a href="#section-12.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-12.1-2">
<dt id="section-12.1-2.1">Type name:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.2">
<p id="section-12.1-2.2.1">application<a href="#section-12.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.3">Subtype name:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.4">
<p id="section-12.1-2.4.1">wimse-exec+jwt<a href="#section-12.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.5">Required parameters:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.6">
<p id="section-12.1-2.6.1">none<a href="#section-12.1-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.7">Optional parameters:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.8">
<p id="section-12.1-2.8.1">none<a href="#section-12.1-2.8.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.9">Encoding considerations:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.10">
<p id="section-12.1-2.10.1">8bit; an ECT is a JWT that is a JWS using the Compact
Serialization, which is a sequence of Base64url-encoded values
separated by period characters.<a href="#section-12.1-2.10.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.11">Security considerations:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.12">
<p id="section-12.1-2.12.1">See the Security Considerations section of this document.<a href="#section-12.1-2.12.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.13">Interoperability considerations:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.14">
<p id="section-12.1-2.14.1">none<a href="#section-12.1-2.14.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.15">Published specification:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.16">
<p id="section-12.1-2.16.1">This document<a href="#section-12.1-2.16.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.17">Applications that use this media type:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.18">
<p id="section-12.1-2.18.1">Applications that implement regulated agentic workflows requiring
execution context tracing and audit trails.<a href="#section-12.1-2.18.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.19">Additional information:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.20">
<p id="section-12.1-2.20.1">Magic number(s): none
File extension(s): none
Macintosh file type code(s): none<a href="#section-12.1-2.20.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.21">Person and email address to contact for further information:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.22">
<p id="section-12.1-2.22.1">Christian Nennemann, ietf@nennemann.de<a href="#section-12.1-2.22.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.23">Intended usage:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.24">
<p id="section-12.1-2.24.1">COMMON<a href="#section-12.1-2.24.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.25">Restrictions on usage:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.26">
<p id="section-12.1-2.26.1">none<a href="#section-12.1-2.26.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.27">Author:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.28">
<p id="section-12.1-2.28.1">Christian Nennemann<a href="#section-12.1-2.28.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.1-2.29">Change controller:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.1-2.30">
<p id="section-12.1-2.30.1">IETF<a href="#section-12.1-2.30.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="header-registration">
<section id="section-12.2">
<h3 id="name-http-header-field-registrat">
<a href="#section-12.2" class="section-number selfRef">12.2. </a><a href="#name-http-header-field-registrat" class="section-name selfRef">HTTP Header Field Registration</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-12.2-1">This document requests registration of the following header field
in the "Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) Field Name Registry"
maintained by IANA:<a href="#section-12.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span class="break"></span><dl class="dlParallel" id="section-12.2-2">
<dt id="section-12.2-2.1">Field name:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.2-2.2">
<p id="section-12.2-2.2.1">Execution-Context<a href="#section-12.2-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.2-2.3">Status:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.2-2.4">
<p id="section-12.2-2.4.1">permanent<a href="#section-12.2-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="section-12.2-2.5">Specification document:</dt>
<dd style="margin-left: 1.5em" id="section-12.2-2.6">
<p id="section-12.2-2.6.1">This document, <a href="#http-header" class="auto internal xref">Section 5</a><a href="#section-12.2-2.6.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="claims-registration">
<section id="section-12.3">
<h3 id="name-jwt-claims-registration">
<a href="#section-12.3" class="section-number selfRef">12.3. </a><a href="#name-jwt-claims-registration" class="section-name selfRef">JWT Claims Registration</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-12.3-1">This document requests registration of the following claims in
the "JSON Web Token Claims" registry maintained by IANA:<a href="#section-12.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-jwt-claims-registrations"></span><div id="_table-claims">
<table class="center" id="table-1">
<caption>
<a href="#table-1" class="selfRef">Table 1</a>:
<a href="#name-jwt-claims-registrations" class="selfRef">JWT Claims Registrations</a>
</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Claim Name</th>
<th class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Claim Description</th>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Change Controller</th>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">wid</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Workflow Identifier</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#exec-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.2</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">tid</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Task Identifier</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#exec-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.2</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">exec_act</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Action/Task Type</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#exec-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.2</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">par</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Parent Task Identifiers</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#exec-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.2</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">pol</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Policy Rule Identifier</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">pol_decision</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Policy Decision Result</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">pol_enforcer</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Policy Enforcer Identity</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">pol_timestamp</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Policy Decision Timestamp</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">inp_hash</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Input Data Hash</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#data-integrity-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.4</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">out_hash</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Output Data Hash</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#data-integrity-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.4</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">inp_classification</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Input Data Classification</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#data-integrity-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.4</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">exec_time_ms</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Execution Time (ms)</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#operational-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.5</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">witnessed_by</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Witness Identities</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#witness-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.6</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">regulated_domain</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Regulatory Domain</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#operational-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.5</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">model_version</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">AI/ML Model Version</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#operational-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.5</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">compensation_required</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Compensation Flag</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#compensation-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.7</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">compensation_reason</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Compensation Reason</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#compensation-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.7</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ext</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Extension Object</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#extension-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.8</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="pol-decision-registry">
<section id="section-12.4">
<h3 id="name-ect-policy-decision-values-">
<a href="#section-12.4" class="section-number selfRef">12.4. </a><a href="#name-ect-policy-decision-values-" class="section-name selfRef">ECT Policy Decision Values Registry</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-12.4-1">This document establishes the "ECT Policy Decision Values"
registry under the "JSON Web Token (JWT)" group. Registration
policy is Specification Required per <span>[<a href="#RFC8126" class="cite xref">RFC8126</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-12.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-12.4-2">The initial contents of the registry are:<a href="#section-12.4-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-ect-policy-decision-values"></span><div id="_table-pol-decision">
<table class="center" id="table-2">
<caption>
<a href="#table-2" class="selfRef">Table 2</a>:
<a href="#name-ect-policy-decision-values" class="selfRef">ECT Policy Decision Values</a>
</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Value</th>
<th class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Description</th>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Change Controller</th>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">approved</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Policy evaluation succeeded</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">rejected</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Policy evaluation failed</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">pending_human_review</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Awaiting human judgment</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#policy-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.3</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="regulated-domain-registry">
<section id="section-12.5">
<h3 id="name-ect-regulated-domain-values">
<a href="#section-12.5" class="section-number selfRef">12.5. </a><a href="#name-ect-regulated-domain-values" class="section-name selfRef">ECT Regulated Domain Values Registry</a>
</h3>
<p id="section-12.5-1">This document establishes the "ECT Regulated Domain Values"
registry under the "JSON Web Token (JWT)" group. Registration
policy is Specification Required per <span>[<a href="#RFC8126" class="cite xref">RFC8126</a>]</span>.<a href="#section-12.5-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="section-12.5-2">The initial contents of the registry are:<a href="#section-12.5-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-ect-regulated-domain-values-2"></span><div id="_table-regulated-domain">
<table class="center" id="table-3">
<caption>
<a href="#table-3" class="selfRef">Table 3</a>:
<a href="#name-ect-regulated-domain-values-2" class="selfRef">ECT Regulated Domain Values</a>
</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Value</th>
<th class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Description</th>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Change Controller</th>
<th class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">medtech</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Medical technology and devices</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#operational-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.5</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">finance</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Financial services and trading</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#operational-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.5</a>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">military</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Military and defense</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">IETF</td>
<td class="text-center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">
<a href="#operational-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.5</a>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="sec-combined-references">
<section id="section-13">
<h2 id="name-references">
<a href="#section-13" class="section-number selfRef">13. </a><a href="#name-references" class="section-name selfRef">References</a>
</h2>
<div id="sec-normative-references">
<section id="section-13.1">
<h3 id="name-normative-references">
<a href="#section-13.1" class="section-number selfRef">13.1. </a><a href="#name-normative-references" class="section-name selfRef">Normative References</a>
</h3>
<dl class="references">
<dt id="I-D.ietf-wimse-arch">[I-D.ietf-wimse-arch]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Salowey, J. A.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Rosomakho, Y.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">H. Tschofenig</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Workload Identity in a Multi System Environment (WIMSE) Architecture"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-wimse-arch-06</span>, <time datetime="2025-09-30" class="refDate">30 September 2025</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-wimse-arch-06">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-wimse-arch-06</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol">[I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Campbell, B.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Salowey, J. A.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Schwenkschuster, A.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">Y. Sheffer</span>, <span class="refTitle">"WIMSE Workload-to-Workload Authentication"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol-07</span>, <time datetime="2025-10-16" class="refDate">16 October 2025</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol-07">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol-07</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC2119">[RFC2119]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Bradner, S.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">BCP 14</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 2119</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC2119</span>, <time datetime="1997-03" class="refDate">March 1997</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC7515">[RFC7515]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Jones, M.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Bradley, J.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">N. Sakimura</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Web Signature (JWS)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 7515</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC7515</span>, <time datetime="2015-05" class="refDate">May 2015</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7515">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7515</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC7517">[RFC7517]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Jones, M.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Web Key (JWK)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 7517</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC7517</span>, <time datetime="2015-05" class="refDate">May 2015</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7517">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7517</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC7518">[RFC7518]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Jones, M.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Web Algorithms (JWA)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 7518</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC7518</span>, <time datetime="2015-05" class="refDate">May 2015</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7518">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7518</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC7519">[RFC7519]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Jones, M.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Bradley, J.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">N. Sakimura</span>, <span class="refTitle">"JSON Web Token (JWT)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 7519</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC7519</span>, <time datetime="2015-05" class="refDate">May 2015</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7519">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7519</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC8126">[RFC8126]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Cotton, M.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Leiba, B.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">T. Narten</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">BCP 26</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 8126</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC8126</span>, <time datetime="2017-06" class="refDate">June 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8126">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8126</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC8174">[RFC8174]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Leiba, B.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">BCP 14</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 8174</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC8174</span>, <time datetime="2017-05" class="refDate">May 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC9110">[RFC9110]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Fielding, R., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Nottingham, M., Ed.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">J. Reschke, Ed.</span>, <span class="refTitle">"HTTP Semantics"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">STD 97</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 9110</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC9110</span>, <time datetime="2022-06" class="refDate">June 2022</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9110</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC9562">[RFC9562]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Davis, K.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Peabody, B.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">P. Leach</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Universally Unique IDentifiers (UUIDs)"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 9562</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC9562</span>, <time datetime="2024-05" class="refDate">May 2024</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9562">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9562</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
<div id="sec-informative-references">
<section id="section-13.2">
<h3 id="name-informative-references">
<a href="#section-13.2" class="section-number selfRef">13.2. </a><a href="#name-informative-references" class="section-name selfRef">Informative References</a>
</h3>
<dl class="references">
<dt id="DORA">[DORA]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">European Parliament and Council of the European Union</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 on digital operational resilience for the financial sector (DORA)"</span>, <time datetime="2022-12-14" class="refDate">14 December 2022</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2554">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2554</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="EU-AI-ACT">[EU-AI-ACT]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">European Parliament and Council of the European Union</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act)"</span>, <time datetime="2024-06-13" class="refDate">13 June 2024</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="EU-MDR">[EU-MDR]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">European Parliament and Council of the European Union</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on medical devices (MDR)"</span>, <time datetime="2017-04-05" class="refDate">5 April 2017</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="FDA-21CFR11">[FDA-21CFR11]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">U.S. Food and Drug Administration</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures"</span>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-11">https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part-11</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="I-D.ietf-scitt-architecture">[I-D.ietf-scitt-architecture]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Birkholz, H.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Delignat-Lavaud, A.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Fournet, C.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Deshpande, Y.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">S. Lasker</span>, <span class="refTitle">"An Architecture for Trustworthy and Transparent Digital Supply Chains"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-scitt-architecture-22</span>, <time datetime="2025-10-10" class="refDate">10 October 2025</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-scitt-architecture-22">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-scitt-architecture-22</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="I-D.ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity">[I-D.ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Yuan, N.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">P. C. Liu</span>, <span class="refTitle">"WIMSE Applicability for AI Agents"</span>, <span class="refContent">Work in Progress</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">Internet-Draft, draft-ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity-01</span>, <time datetime="2025-10-20" class="refDate">20 October 2025</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity-01">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ni-wimse-ai-agent-identity-01</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="MIFID-II">[MIFID-II]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">European Parliament and Council of the European Union</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on markets in financial instruments (MiFID II)"</span>, <time datetime="2014-05-15" class="refDate">15 May 2014</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/65">https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/65</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="OPENTELEMETRY">[OPENTELEMETRY]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Cloud Native Computing Foundation</span>, <span class="refTitle">"OpenTelemetry Specification"</span>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://opentelemetry.io/docs/specs/otel/">https://opentelemetry.io/docs/specs/otel/</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC3552">[RFC3552]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Rescorla, E.</span> and <span class="refAuthor">B. Korver</span>, <span class="refTitle">"Guidelines for Writing RFC Text on Security Considerations"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">BCP 72</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 3552</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC3552</span>, <time datetime="2003-07" class="refDate">July 2003</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3552">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3552</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC8693">[RFC8693]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Jones, M.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Nadalin, A.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Campbell, B., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Bradley, J.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">C. Mortimore</span>, <span class="refTitle">"OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 8693</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC8693</span>, <time datetime="2020-01" class="refDate">January 2020</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8693">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8693</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="RFC9421">[RFC9421]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refAuthor">Backman, A., Ed.</span>, <span class="refAuthor">Richer, J., Ed.</span>, and <span class="refAuthor">M. Sporny</span>, <span class="refTitle">"HTTP Message Signatures"</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">RFC 9421</span>, <span class="seriesInfo">DOI 10.17487/RFC9421</span>, <time datetime="2024-02" class="refDate">February 2024</time>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9421">https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9421</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
<dt id="SPIFFE">[SPIFFE]</dt>
<dd>
<span class="refTitle">"Secure Production Identity Framework for Everyone (SPIFFE)"</span>, <span>&lt;<a href="https://spiffe.io/docs/latest/spiffe-about/overview/">https://spiffe.io/docs/latest/spiffe-about/overview/</a>&gt;</span>. </dd>
<dd class="break"></dd>
</dl>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="related-work">
<section id="appendix-A">
<h2 id="name-related-work">
<a href="#name-related-work" class="section-name selfRef">Related Work</a>
</h2>
<div id="wimse-workload-identity">
<section id="appendix-A.1">
<h3 id="name-wimse-workload-identity">
<a href="#name-wimse-workload-identity" class="section-name selfRef">WIMSE Workload Identity</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-A.1-1">The WIMSE architecture <span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-arch" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-arch</a>]</span> and service-to-
service protocol <span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-wimse-s2s-protocol</a>]</span> provide the
identity foundation upon which ECTs are built. WIT/WPT answer
"who is this agent?" and "does it control the claimed key?" while
ECTs record "what did this agent do?" and "what policy was
evaluated?" Together they form an identity-plus-accountability
framework for regulated agentic systems.<a href="#appendix-A.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="oauth-20-token-exchange">
<section id="appendix-A.2">
<h3 id="name-oauth-20-token-exchange">
<a href="#name-oauth-20-token-exchange" class="section-name selfRef">OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-A.2-1"><span>[<a href="#RFC8693" class="cite xref">RFC8693</a>]</span> defines the OAuth 2.0 Token Exchange protocol and
registers the "act" (Actor) claim in the JWT Claims registry.
ECTs intentionally use the distinct claim name "exec_act" for the
action/task type to avoid collision with the "act" claim.
Transaction tokens in OAuth establish API authorization context;
ECTs serve the complementary purpose of recording execution
accountability across multi-step workflows.<a href="#appendix-A.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="distributed-tracing-opentelemetry">
<section id="appendix-A.3">
<h3 id="name-distributed-tracing-opentel">
<a href="#name-distributed-tracing-opentel" class="section-name selfRef">Distributed Tracing (OpenTelemetry)</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-A.3-1">OpenTelemetry <span>[<a href="#OPENTELEMETRY" class="cite xref">OPENTELEMETRY</a>]</span> and similar distributed tracing
systems provide observability for debugging and monitoring. ECTs
differ in several important ways: ECTs are cryptographically
signed per-task with the agent's private key; ECTs are
tamper-evident through JWS signatures; ECTs enforce DAG validation
rules; and ECTs are designed for regulatory audit rather than
operational monitoring. OpenTelemetry data is typically controlled
by the platform operator and can be modified or deleted without
detection. ECTs and distributed traces are complementary: traces
provide observability while ECTs provide signed execution records.
ECTs may reference OpenTelemetry trace identifiers in the "ext"
claim for correlation.<a href="#appendix-A.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="blockchain-and-distributed-ledgers">
<section id="appendix-A.4">
<h3 id="name-blockchain-and-distributed-">
<a href="#name-blockchain-and-distributed-" class="section-name selfRef">Blockchain and Distributed Ledgers</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-A.4-1">Both ECTs and blockchain systems provide immutable records. This
specification intentionally defines only the ECT token format and
is agnostic to the storage mechanism. ECTs can be stored in
append-only logs, databases with cryptographic commitments,
blockchain networks, or any storage providing the required
properties defined in <a href="#ledger-interface" class="auto internal xref">Section 8</a>.<a href="#appendix-A.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="scitt-supply-chain-integrity-transparency-and-trust">
<section id="appendix-A.5">
<h3 id="name-scitt-supply-chain-integrit">
<a href="#name-scitt-supply-chain-integrit" class="section-name selfRef">SCITT (Supply Chain Integrity, Transparency, and Trust)</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-A.5-1">The SCITT architecture <span>[<a href="#I-D.ietf-scitt-architecture" class="cite xref">I-D.ietf-scitt-architecture</a>]</span> defines a
framework for creating transparent and auditable supply chain
records through Transparency Services, Signed Statements, and
Receipts. ECTs and SCITT are naturally complementary: the ECT
"wid" (Workflow Identifier) claim can serve as a correlation
identifier referenced in SCITT Signed Statements, linking a
complete ECT audit trail to a supply chain transparency record.
For example, in a regulated manufacturing workflow, each agent
step produces an ECT (recording what was done, by whom, under
what policy), while the overall workflow identified by "wid" is
registered as a SCITT Signed Statement on a Transparency Service.
This enables auditors to verify both the individual execution
steps (via ECT DAG validation) and the end-to-end supply chain
integrity (via SCITT Receipts) using the "wid" as the shared
correlation point. The "ext" claim in ECTs (<a href="#exec-claims" class="auto internal xref">Section 4.2.2</a>)
can carry SCITT-specific metadata such as Transparency Service
identifiers or Receipt references for tighter integration.<a href="#appendix-A.5-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="w3c-verifiable-credentials">
<section id="appendix-A.6">
<h3 id="name-w3c-verifiable-credentials">
<a href="#name-w3c-verifiable-credentials" class="section-name selfRef">W3C Verifiable Credentials</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-A.6-1">W3C Verifiable Credentials represent claims about subjects (e.g.,
identity, qualifications). ECTs represent execution records of
actions (what happened, in what order, under what policy). While
both use JWT/JWS as a serialization format, their semantics and
use cases are distinct.<a href="#appendix-A.6-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="implementation-guidance">
<section id="appendix-B">
<h2 id="name-implementation-guidance">
<a href="#name-implementation-guidance" class="section-name selfRef">Implementation Guidance</a>
</h2>
<div id="minimal-implementation">
<section id="appendix-B.1">
<h3 id="name-minimal-implementation">
<a href="#name-minimal-implementation" class="section-name selfRef">Minimal Implementation</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-B.1-1">A minimal conforming implementation needs to:<a href="#appendix-B.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<ol start="1" type="1" class="normal type-1" id="appendix-B.1-2">
<li id="appendix-B.1-2.1">
<p id="appendix-B.1-2.1.1">Create JWTs with all required claims ("iss", "aud", "iat",
"exp", "jti", "tid", "exec_act", "par", "pol",
"pol_decision").<a href="#appendix-B.1-2.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="appendix-B.1-2.2">
<p id="appendix-B.1-2.2.1">Sign ECTs with the agent's private key using an algorithm
matching the WIT (ES256 recommended).<a href="#appendix-B.1-2.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="appendix-B.1-2.3">
<p id="appendix-B.1-2.3.1">Verify ECT signatures against WIT public keys.<a href="#appendix-B.1-2.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="appendix-B.1-2.4">
<p id="appendix-B.1-2.4.1">Perform DAG validation (parent existence, temporal ordering,
cycle detection).<a href="#appendix-B.1-2.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li id="appendix-B.1-2.5">
<p id="appendix-B.1-2.5.1">Append verified ECTs to an audit ledger.<a href="#appendix-B.1-2.5.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ol>
</section>
</div>
<div id="storage-recommendations">
<section id="appendix-B.2">
<h3 id="name-storage-recommendations">
<a href="#name-storage-recommendations" class="section-name selfRef">Storage Recommendations</a>
</h3>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.2-1.1">
<p id="appendix-B.2-1.1.1">Append-only log: Simplest approach; immutability by design.<a href="#appendix-B.2-1.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.2-1.2">
<p id="appendix-B.2-1.2.1">Database with hash chains: Periodic cryptographic commitments
over batches of entries.<a href="#appendix-B.2-1.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.2-1.3">
<p id="appendix-B.2-1.3.1">Distributed ledger: Maximum immutability guarantees for
cross-organizational audit.<a href="#appendix-B.2-1.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.2-1.4">
<p id="appendix-B.2-1.4.1">Hybrid: Hot storage in a database, cold archive in immutable
storage.<a href="#appendix-B.2-1.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="performance-considerations">
<section id="appendix-B.3">
<h3 id="name-performance-considerations">
<a href="#name-performance-considerations" class="section-name selfRef">Performance Considerations</a>
</h3>
<ul class="normal">
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.3-1.1">
<p id="appendix-B.3-1.1.1">ES256 signature verification: approximately 1ms per ECT on
modern hardware.<a href="#appendix-B.3-1.1.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.3-1.2">
<p id="appendix-B.3-1.2.1">DAG validation: O(V) where V is the number of reachable ancestor
nodes (typically small for shallow workflows).<a href="#appendix-B.3-1.2.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.3-1.3">
<p id="appendix-B.3-1.3.1">JSON serialization: sub-millisecond per ECT.<a href="#appendix-B.3-1.3.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
<li class="normal" id="appendix-B.3-1.4">
<p id="appendix-B.3-1.4.1">Total per-request overhead: approximately 5-10ms, acceptable
for regulated workflows where correctness is prioritized over
latency.<a href="#appendix-B.3-1.4.1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</section>
</div>
<div id="interoperability">
<section id="appendix-B.4">
<h3 id="name-interoperability">
<a href="#name-interoperability" class="section-name selfRef">Interoperability</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-B.4-1">Implementations are expected to use established JWT/JWS libraries
(JOSE) for token creation and verification. Custom cryptographic
implementations are strongly discouraged. Implementations are
expected to be tested against multiple JWT libraries to ensure
interoperability.<a href="#appendix-B.4-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="regulatory-compliance-mapping">
<section id="appendix-C">
<h2 id="name-regulatory-compliance-mappi">
<a href="#name-regulatory-compliance-mappi" class="section-name selfRef">Regulatory Compliance Mapping</a>
</h2>
<p id="appendix-C-1">The following table summarizes how ECTs can contribute to
compliance with various regulatory frameworks. ECTs are a
technical building block; achieving compliance requires
additional organizational measures beyond this specification.<a href="#appendix-C-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<span id="name-regulatory-compliance-mappin"></span><div id="_table-regulatory">
<table class="center" id="table-4">
<caption>
<a href="#table-4" class="selfRef">Table 4</a>:
<a href="#name-regulatory-compliance-mappin" class="selfRef">Regulatory Compliance Mapping</a>
</caption>
<thead>
<tr>
<th class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Regulation</th>
<th class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Requirement</th>
<th class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ECT Contribution</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">FDA 21 CFR Part 11</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Audit trails recording date, time, operator, actions (11.10(e))</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Cryptographic signatures and append-only ledger contribute to audit trail requirements</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">EU MDR</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Technical documentation traceability (Annex II)</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ECTs provide signed records of AI-assisted decision sequences</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">EU AI Act Art. 12</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Automatic logging capabilities for high-risk AI</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ECTs contribute cryptographic activity logging</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">EU AI Act Art. 14</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Human oversight capability</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ECTs can record evidence that human oversight events occurred</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">MiFID II</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Transaction records for supervisory authorities</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ECTs provide cryptographic execution sequence records</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">DORA Art. 12</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ICT activity logging policies</td>
<td class="text-left" rowspan="1" colspan="1">ECT ledger contributes to ICT activity audit trail</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="examples">
<section id="appendix-D">
<h2 id="name-examples">
<a href="#name-examples" class="section-name selfRef">Examples</a>
</h2>
<div id="example-1-simple-two-agent-workflow">
<section id="appendix-D.1">
<h3 id="name-example-1-simple-two-agent-">
<a href="#name-example-1-simple-two-agent-" class="section-name selfRef">Example 1: Simple Two-Agent Workflow</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-D.1-1">Agent A executes a data retrieval task and sends the ECT to
Agent B:<a href="#appendix-D.1-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="appendix-D.1-2">ECT JOSE Header:<a href="#appendix-D.1-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.1-3">
<pre>
{
"alg": "ES256",
"typ": "wimse-exec+jwt",
"kid": "agent-a-key-2026-02"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.1-3" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.1-4">ECT Payload:<a href="#appendix-D.1-4" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.1-5">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://example.com/agent/data-retrieval",
"sub": "spiffe://example.com/agent/data-retrieval",
"aud": "spiffe://example.com/agent/validator",
"iat": 1772064150,
"exp": 1772064750,
"wid": "b1c2d3e4-f5a6-7890-bcde-f01234567890",
"tid": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440001",
"exec_act": "fetch_patient_data",
"par": [],
"pol": "clinical_data_access_policy_v1",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"inp_hash": "sha-256:n4bQgYhMfWWaL-qgxVrQFaO_TxsrC4Is0V1sFbDwCgg",
"out_hash": "sha-256:LCa0a2j_xo_5m0U8HTBBNBNCLXBkg7-g-YpeiGJm564",
"exec_time_ms": 142,
"regulated_domain": "medtech"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.1-5" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.1-6">Agent B receives the ECT, verifies it, executes a validation
task, and creates its own ECT:<a href="#appendix-D.1-6" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.1-7">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://example.com/agent/validator",
"sub": "spiffe://example.com/agent/validator",
"aud": "spiffe://example.com/system/ledger",
"iat": 1772064160,
"exp": 1772064760,
"wid": "b1c2d3e4-f5a6-7890-bcde-f01234567890",
"tid": "550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440002",
"exec_act": "validate_safety",
"par": ["550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440001"],
"pol": "safety_validation_policy_v2",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"exec_time_ms": 89,
"regulated_domain": "medtech"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.1-7" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.1-8">The resulting DAG:<a href="#appendix-D.1-8" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-D.1-9">
<pre>
task-...-0001 (fetch_patient_data)
|
v
task-...-0002 (validate_safety)
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.1-9" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="example-2-medical-device-sdlc-with-release-approval">
<section id="appendix-D.2">
<h3 id="name-example-2-medical-device-sd">
<a href="#name-example-2-medical-device-sd" class="section-name selfRef">Example 2: Medical Device SDLC with Release Approval</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-D.2-1">A multi-step medical device software lifecycle workflow with
autonomous agents and human release approval:<a href="#appendix-D.2-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<p id="appendix-D.2-2">Task 1 (Spec Review Agent):<a href="#appendix-D.2-2" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.2-3">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/spec-reviewer",
"sub": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/spec-reviewer",
"aud": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/code-gen",
"iat": 1772064150,
"exp": 1772064750,
"wid": "c2d3e4f5-a6b7-8901-cdef-012345678901",
"tid": "a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000001",
"exec_act": "review_requirements_spec",
"par": [],
"pol": "spec_review_policy_v2",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"regulated_domain": "medtech",
"model_version": "spec-review-v3.1",
"inp_hash": "sha-256:n4bQgYhMfWWaL-qgxVrQFaO_TxsrC4Is0V1sFbDwCgg",
"out_hash": "sha-256:LCa0a2j_xo_5m0U8HTBBNBNCLXBkg7-g-YpeiGJm564"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-3" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.2-4">Task 2 (Code Generation Agent):<a href="#appendix-D.2-4" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.2-5">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/code-gen",
"sub": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/code-gen",
"aud": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/test-runner",
"iat": 1772064200,
"exp": 1772064800,
"wid": "c2d3e4f5-a6b7-8901-cdef-012345678901",
"tid": "a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000002",
"exec_act": "implement_module",
"par": ["a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000001"],
"pol": "coding_standards_v3",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"regulated_domain": "medtech",
"model_version": "codegen-v2.4"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-5" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.2-6">Task 3 (Autonomous Test Agent):<a href="#appendix-D.2-6" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.2-7">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/test-runner",
"sub": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/test-runner",
"aud": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/build",
"iat": 1772064260,
"exp": 1772064860,
"wid": "c2d3e4f5-a6b7-8901-cdef-012345678901",
"tid": "a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000003",
"exec_act": "execute_test_suite",
"par": ["a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000002"],
"pol": "test_coverage_policy_v1",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"regulated_domain": "medtech",
"exec_time_ms": 4523
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-7" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.2-8">Task 4 (Build Agent):<a href="#appendix-D.2-8" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.2-9">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/build",
"sub": "spiffe://meddev.example/agent/build",
"aud": "spiffe://meddev.example/human/release-mgr-42",
"iat": 1772064310,
"exp": 1772064910,
"wid": "c2d3e4f5-a6b7-8901-cdef-012345678901",
"tid": "a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000004",
"exec_act": "build_release_artifact",
"par": ["a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000003"],
"pol": "build_validation_v2",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"regulated_domain": "medtech",
"out_hash": "sha-256:Ry1YfOoW2XpC5Mq8HkGzNx3dL9vBa4sUjE7iKt0wPZc"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-9" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.2-10">Task 5 (Human Release Manager Approval):<a href="#appendix-D.2-10" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.2-11">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://meddev.example/human/release-mgr-42",
"sub": "spiffe://meddev.example/human/release-mgr-42",
"aud": "spiffe://meddev.example/system/ledger",
"iat": 1772064510,
"exp": 1772065110,
"wid": "c2d3e4f5-a6b7-8901-cdef-012345678901",
"tid": "a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000005",
"exec_act": "approve_release",
"par": ["a1b2c3d4-0001-0000-0000-000000000004"],
"pol": "release_approval_policy",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"pol_enforcer": "spiffe://meddev.example/human/release-mgr-42",
"witnessed_by": [
"spiffe://meddev.example/audit/qa-observer-1"
],
"regulated_domain": "medtech"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-11" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.2-12">The resulting DAG records the complete SDLC: spec review preceded
implementation, implementation preceded testing, testing preceded
build, and a human release manager approved the final release
with independent witness attestation.<a href="#appendix-D.2-12" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-D.2-13">
<pre>
task-...-0001 (review_requirements_spec)
|
v
task-...-0002 (implement_module)
|
v
task-...-0003 (execute_test_suite)
|
v
task-...-0004 (build_release_artifact)
|
v
task-...-0005 (approve_release) [human, witnessed]
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.2-13" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.2-14">An FDA auditor reconstructs this DAG by querying the audit ledger
for all ECTs with wid "c2d3e4f5-a6b7-8901-cdef-012345678901" and
verifying each signature. The DAG provides cryptographic evidence
that the SDLC followed the prescribed process with human oversight
at the release gate.<a href="#appendix-D.2-14" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="example-3-parallel-execution-with-join">
<section id="appendix-D.3">
<h3 id="name-example-3-parallel-executio">
<a href="#name-example-3-parallel-executio" class="section-name selfRef">Example 3: Parallel Execution with Join</a>
</h3>
<p id="appendix-D.3-1">A workflow where two tasks execute in parallel and a third task
depends on both:<a href="#appendix-D.3-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="alignLeft art-text artwork" id="appendix-D.3-2">
<pre>
task-...-0001 (assess_risk)
| \
v v
task-...-0002 task-...-0003
(check (verify
compliance) liquidity)
| /
v v
task-...-0004 (execute_trade)
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.3-2" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.3-3">Task 004 ECT payload:<a href="#appendix-D.3-3" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
<div class="lang-json sourcecode" id="appendix-D.3-4">
<pre>
{
"iss": "spiffe://bank.example/agent/execution",
"sub": "spiffe://bank.example/agent/execution",
"aud": "spiffe://bank.example/system/ledger",
"iat": 1772064250,
"exp": 1772064850,
"wid": "d3e4f5a6-b7c8-9012-def0-123456789012",
"tid": "f1e2d3c4-0004-0000-0000-000000000004",
"exec_act": "execute_trade",
"par": [
"f1e2d3c4-0002-0000-0000-000000000002",
"f1e2d3c4-0003-0000-0000-000000000003"
],
"pol": "trade_execution_policy_v3",
"pol_decision": "approved",
"regulated_domain": "finance"
}
</pre><a href="#appendix-D.3-4" class="pilcrow"></a>
</div>
<p id="appendix-D.3-5">The "par" array with two entries records that both compliance
checking and liquidity verification were completed before trade
execution.<a href="#appendix-D.3-5" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div id="acknowledgments">
<section id="appendix-E">
<h2 id="name-acknowledgments">
<a href="#name-acknowledgments" class="section-name selfRef">Acknowledgments</a>
</h2>
<p id="appendix-E-1">The author thanks the WIMSE working group for their foundational
work on workload identity in multi-system environments. The
concepts of Workload Identity Tokens and Workload Proof Tokens
provide the identity foundation upon which execution context
tracing is built.<a href="#appendix-E-1" class="pilcrow"></a></p>
</section>
</div>
<div id="authors-addresses">
<section id="appendix-F">
<h2 id="name-authors-address">
<a href="#name-authors-address" class="section-name selfRef">Author's Address</a>
</h2>
<address class="vcard">
<div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="fn nameRole">Christian Nennemann</span></div>
<div dir="auto" class="left"><span class="org">Independent Researcher</span></div>
<div class="email">
<span>Email:</span>
<a href="mailto:ietf@nennemann.de" class="email">ietf@nennemann.de</a>
</div>
</address>
</section>
</div>
<script>const toc = document.getElementById("toc");
toc.querySelector("h2").addEventListener("click", e => {
toc.classList.toggle("active");
});
toc.querySelector("nav").addEventListener("click", e => {
toc.classList.remove("active");
});
</script>
</body>
</html>