3 ms·

AC2 is an open standard that puts users back in control of AI-driven signing operations, providing verifiable proof of intent and credential isolation. The pro

AC2 is an open standard that puts users back in control of AI-driven signing operations, providing verifiable proof of intent and credential isolation. The problem: a compromised agent runtime (e.g. a malicious plugin dependency) can leak everything injected into it like API keys or session tokens, and there's no way to prove whether a human actually approved what happened, since chat-based "approvals" are just messages, spoofable and session-hijackable. AC2 closes both gaps. Approvals become a FIDO2 passkey signature from your device, that's hardware-bound, phishing-resistant, and a real audit trail instead of a chat message. And credentials never enter the runtime at all: the agent gets a signed authorization, not the key. Compromise the runtime, there's nothing to steal. Under the hood: AC2 opens a direct, end-to-end encrypted WebRTC connection between a user's wallet and an agent. When the agent needs to sign something (a payment, a commit, an API call), it sends the request via AC2, the user approves from their own wallet, and the signature is delegated back. The private key never leaves the user's device. Built on three open standards: DIDComm v2.0 (messaging), WebAuthn/FIDO2 (hardware-bound auth), and WebRTC DataChannel (P2P transport, no relay servers). Lightweight (~50 lines for a basic flow), blockchain-agnostic, and works alongside your existing setup. One plugin, one command. Built by the Algorand Foundation team behind Pera Wallet, Rocca, Intermezzo, and LiquidAuth. Use cases include code deploys, client comms, API access, x402 payments, and intent-based delegation via AP2 IntentMandates. Spec is live and open. Reference implementation (AC2 Wallet) is on GitHub, Play Store, and App Store, with a plugin to try the full flow. This is v1, feedback welcome.

Miyamura80 1mo ago
This is cool, we've built similar things, I'm a bit uneasy with crypto stuff involved, especially with algorand But FIDO2 passkey signature I absolutely agree should be the way to go. Just need more open standard without tokens involved
- josephcecala 1mo ago
  Fair, and to be clear, you can use AC2 today with zero crypto exposure. The whole protocol for API access, git commits, client comms uses FIDO2 signing, DIDComm, and WebRTC. No wallet, no chain, no token needed. Algorand only shows up in the reference implementation for the payment use case (x402), since something has to settle an actual transfer. That's opt-in, not required. Skip payments and you never touch it.
  - semiquaver 1mo ago
    Ever page says “AC2 is a self-custodial Algorand wallet.” How can I use something today that is a cryptocurrency wallet with no cryptocurrency exposure?
embedding-shape 1mo ago
Obviously it's using Algorand because it's built by people working with/at Algorand, but regardless; wouldn't this all be possible to build without any cryptocurrency at all? And if no, why is Algorand particularly well suited for this (if it is), in contrast with anything else, say zCash or whatever?
- josephcecala 1mo ago
  Good questions, the core doesn't need a blockchain at all. AC2 is just an approval/signing layer (DIDComm + WebAuthn/FIDO2 + WebRTC), so most use cases like API access, git commits, and client comms never touch a chain. Blockchain only enters when what's being signed is a transaction, like an x402 payment. For that case we use Algorand, but AC2 is chain-agnostic, meaning any chain could plug in. Algorand fit because of instant finality (no forking), low predictable fees for frequent small agent payments, and post-quantum resilient signatures. zCash optimizes for privacy, which isn't really our problem, we care about speed/finality for agent-authorized actions, not hiding the payment. So the blockchain piece is more of a plugin for one use case than the foundation of the protocol. Hope that answers your questions!
  - embedding-shape 1mo ago
    Judging by my own initial reaction, and other commentators here too, if this tech doesn't actually need any cryptocurrency to be useful, then probably you shouldn't mention that at all on the landing page, but let the people who need that stuff find it on some other pages. You'll fight a huge deluge of knee-jerk reactions otherwise, as you can tell :) Regardless, thanks for expanding and explaining, and good luck to you all! :)
    - josephcecala 1mo ago
      Appreciate that feedback, I will relay this back to the team and see if they're on-board with removing the blockchain references.
otabdeveloper4 1mo ago
Do I understand this right? As long as you can prove that a real human "approved" sharing the God-mode long-lived token with the keys to kingdom with an LLM, it's all good and we're secure? This is the state of the art of computer security?
- josephcecala 1mo ago
  [flagged]

Miyamura80 1mo ago

This is cool, we've built similar things, I'm a bit uneasy with crypto stuff involved, especially with algorand But FIDO2 passkey signature I absolutely agree should be the way to go. Just need more open standard without tokens involved

josephcecala 1mo ago
Fair, and to be clear, you can use AC2 today with zero crypto exposure. The whole protocol for API access, git commits, client comms uses FIDO2 signing, DIDComm, and WebRTC. No wallet, no chain, no token needed. Algorand only shows up in the reference implementation for the payment use case (x402), since something has to settle an actual transfer. That's opt-in, not required. Skip payments and you never touch it.
- semiquaver 1mo ago
  Ever page says “AC2 is a self-custodial Algorand wallet.” How can I use something today that is a cryptocurrency wallet with no cryptocurrency exposure?

embedding-shape 1mo ago

Obviously it's using Algorand because it's built by people working with/at Algorand, but regardless; wouldn't this all be possible to build without any cryptocurrency at all? And if no, why is Algorand particularly well suited for this (if it is), in contrast with anything else, say zCash or whatever?

josephcecala 1mo ago
Good questions, the core doesn't need a blockchain at all. AC2 is just an approval/signing layer (DIDComm + WebAuthn/FIDO2 + WebRTC), so most use cases like API access, git commits, and client comms never touch a chain. Blockchain only enters when what's being signed is a transaction, like an x402 payment. For that case we use Algorand, but AC2 is chain-agnostic, meaning any chain could plug in. Algorand fit because of instant finality (no forking), low predictable fees for frequent small agent payments, and post-quantum resilient signatures. zCash optimizes for privacy, which isn't really our problem, we care about speed/finality for agent-authorized actions, not hiding the payment. So the blockchain piece is more of a plugin for one use case than the foundation of the protocol. Hope that answers your questions!
- embedding-shape 1mo ago
  Judging by my own initial reaction, and other commentators here too, if this tech doesn't actually need any cryptocurrency to be useful, then probably you shouldn't mention that at all on the landing page, but let the people who need that stuff find it on some other pages. You'll fight a huge deluge of knee-jerk reactions otherwise, as you can tell :) Regardless, thanks for expanding and explaining, and good luck to you all! :)
  - josephcecala 1mo ago
    Appreciate that feedback, I will relay this back to the team and see if they're on-board with removing the blockchain references.

otabdeveloper4 1mo ago

Do I understand this right? As long as you can prove that a real human "approved" sharing the God-mode long-lived token with the keys to kingdom with an LLM, it's all good and we're secure? This is the state of the art of computer security?

josephcecala 1mo ago
[flagged]