The confirmation boundary
A human click should not turn stale authorization into execution authority.
AIGIS records proposal and confirmation evidence, and production execution depends on the target system's native or delegated user identity path.
Action safety / AIGIS resources
Human-approved AI actions need fresh authorization at confirmation time.
A proposal is not the same as an execution. The confirmation path needs its own authorization story.
Executive read
The short version, before the deep dive.
Separate read context, proposed action, human confirmation, and execution.
Fresh checks matter when permissions can change between proposal and confirmation.
Production writes should be blocked or propose-only when native or delegated identity is unavailable.
The audit trail should record the confirmation path.
Analysis
What matters
The safe fallback
If the target system cannot execute under the right user identity, the action should stay as a proposal or be blocked.
That is safer than letting a service account silently mutate records after an advisory check.
Resource packet
Turn this into a review worksheet.
Evidence packet
Permission-Provenance Evidence Packet
Capture user context, system of record, enforcement tier, stripped fields, model route, response, hash marker, and fallback notes.
Salesforce is the production proof path. ServiceNow and SAP are design-partner co-development paths with asymmetric enforcement that must be disclosed in diligence.
Keep reading
Related resources.
Architecture
Human-in-the-Loop AI Writes
Safe AI writes require explicit approval plus a fresh permission check at confirmation time, not only when the AI drafts the proposal.
Audit
AI Permission Audit Trail
The audit elements needed to explain what an AI answer was allowed to know.
Security
CISO AI Audit Readiness Brief
A concise CISO-oriented brief for evaluating AI governance evidence, permission enforcement, and connector asymmetry.