One thing kept pulling my attention away while I was reading through @NewtonProtocol documentation. I expected to spend most of my time understanding how authorization works, but I ended up thinking much more about who defines the authorization rules in the first place.

The more I looked into Newton Protocol, the clearer it became that its policy engine doesn't decide what's safe or unsafe. It simply enforces the policy it's given. That sounds obvious, but I think it's an important distinction that often gets overlooked.

If a policy is too broad or poorly designed, the protocol can still enforce it flawlessly while producing an outcome nobody intended. In that case, the failure isn't in authorization it's in policy design.

That's why I keep wondering if policy governance is actually the real security boundary. As AI agents become more capable, writing good policies may end up being just as important as building reliable authorization infrastructure.$NEWT #Newt @NewtonProtocol

What's the biggest trust assumption in Newton Protocol?