OWASP Agentic Solutions Landscape

This is a reading of somebody else’s checklist against the guarantees CTRLRun tests. The OWASP GenAI Security Project keeps a directory of solutions for agentic applications, and its submission form scores a solution on nine lifecycle stages, the ten entries of the Agentic Top 10, and about forty capability checkboxes. This page says which of those CTRLRun can honestly tick, which it can tick in part, and which it cannot. One row per checkbox, in the form’s own wording, each pointing at a guarantee, a command or a document. It is not a listing claim, a conformance claim, or an endorsement. OWASP states that it does not endorse or recommend products or services, and a directory entry is a directory entry. Most of the boxes below are not ticked, and that is the half that makes the ticked ones credible.

What was read, and against which version


Document	AI Security Solutions Landscape, Agentic solution submission form
Publisher	OWASP GenAI Security Project, OWASP Foundation
Form	https://genai.owasp.org/solution-submission-agentic/
Read on	2026-09-10
Written against	CTRLRun v1.0, guarantees `G1`–`G24`

Written against v1.0, and the version is printed on every row that needs one. The guarantee catalogue this page reads is the one v1.0 freezes: G1–G11 ship today, and G12–G24 arrive with v0.7 through v0.9 on the chain the roadmap sets out. A row whose Since column names a version that is not yet tagged is a (design) row until it is, and a reader on an earlier release should discount it. Nothing here is ticked on the strength of a version that the roadmap does not already commit to before 1.0. The form’s entry codes are ASI01:26 through ASI10:26, the same 2026 edition the OWASP Agentic Top 10 reading was written against; that page records how the ten titles were derived and asks anyone holding the published PDF to check them. Three words. Yes means a guarantee or a shipped command does what the checkbox says, and the row names it. Partly means CTRLRun does a stated part of it, and the row says which part it does not. No means nothing in CTRLRun addresses the box, and the reason is one sentence.

Lifecycle stages

The form asks which stages of the agent lifecycle a solution covers. CTRLRun is a library that sits at one point, between the decision to act and the call that acts, so it reaches most stages from that one point rather than covering each in its own right.

Stage	Status	What CTRLRun has there	Since
Scope & Plan	Partly	A published threat model of the execution boundary (THREAT_MODEL), and a policy document that is the plan for what an agent may do. Nothing that models your agent for you.	v0.1
Develop & Experiment	Yes	`@protect` on any function in the process; `ctrlrun scan` reports the consequential call sites a policy does not cover.	v0.1, scan since v0.6
Augment & Fine Tune Data	No	CTRLRun never touches training data, models or memory.	none
Test & Evaluate	Yes	`ctrlrun verify` runs the kernel’s own failure scenarios against your configuration and reports pass, fail or not applicable per guarantee (verify).	v0.4
Release	Yes	The `ctrlrun verify` GitHub Action and badge as a release gate; the badge means declared guarantees pass, never “this agent is secure by inspection”.	v0.4
Deploy	Yes	The MCP gateway in front of an existing tool server; framework adapters; observe mode to roll out without refusing anything yet.	v0.2, v0.3
Operate	Yes	Exact-action approvals; `ctrlrun resolve` for an `AMBIGUOUS` effect; the operator MCP server; break-glass as a recorded grant; `ctrlrun revoke --by` / `--under`.	v0.1, v0.8
Monitor	Yes	Receipts on a hash chain with an external anchor; OpenTelemetry export; `ctrlrun stats`; enforcement coverage from events already written.	v0.6, v0.11
Govern	Yes	Authority grants and delegation that cannot escalate; approver entitlement; consequence budgets; task-bound authority; a policy change as a protected action. Action governance, in the one sense the roadmap permits: what an action is allowed to do, not how an organisation runs its agents.	v0.3, v0.8, v0.9

Capabilities, checkbox by checkbox

The wording in the first column is the form’s, quoted so a reviewer can match rows without translation. Where the form names a technology as an example (e.g., Sigstore, Immudb), the example is theirs and is not a claim that CTRLRun uses it.

Scope & Plan

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Support for Gen AI Security Project - Agentic Security Threat Modeling Approach	No	CTRLRun publishes its own threat model of one boundary. It does not implement or support the project’s modelling approach.	none
Conducting Agentic Threat Modeling	Partly	THREAT_MODEL is a threat model of CTRLRun: what it refuses, and the four things it states as out of scope: a compromised host, a malicious administrator, a lying remote, code that bypasses the decorator. It is a worked example, not a tool.	v0.1
Draft policy Agent for tool scopes	Yes	The policy document is the list of actions an agent may propose, with conditions; anything not in it is refused (`G6`). Starting-point policies ship under `examples/policies/`, each headed adapt before use.	v0.1
Identify system-wide non-human Identities & Auth Protocols	No	CTRLRun consumes a principal from an `IdentityProvider` and issues nothing. It has no inventory of identities.	none
Draft policy for Agent privilege boundaries	Yes	An authority grant names a subject, permitted actions, resource patterns, constraints, environments and an expiry; opt-in, then fail-closed (`G7`, `G8`).	v0.3
Draft policy for delegation logic	Yes	A delegated grant is valid only as a subset of its parent on every dimension, checked at creation and on every evaluation; omission is rejected, not inherited (`G9`). Task binding adds one more dimension (`G24`).	v0.3, v0.9
Define controls for memory scoping, isolation & long-term persistance	No	CTRLRun never reads or writes an agent’s memory.	none

Develop & Experiment

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Perform SAST/DAST on agent planning code, tool wrappers, & plugin interfaces	Partly	`ctrlrun scan` reads a Python tree and reports the consequential call sites and policy entries CTRLRun is not covering. It is a coverage scanner, not a vulnerability scanner, and its report says what it misses by construction on every run.	v0.6
Harden agent loop logic against infinite loops, unsafe function routing, & unauthorized self-modification	Partly	A retry loop cannot turn one intended effect into several (`G3`, `G5`), an unknown action is refused (`G6`), and renewal after `FAILED` has an operator-set ceiling (`G15`). Nothing here inspects loop logic or prevents self-modification.	v0.1, v0.7
Validate connector (e.g., MCP) contracts (input/output schemas & permissions)	Partly	The gateway maps every MCP tool call onto a policy decision, and a policy entry may pin the hash of an upstream’s advertised tool schema so a schema that moved under an approved name is a `deny`. It does not validate schemas in general.	v0.2, v0.10
Implement policy enforcement hooks in Frameworks (e.g. LangGraph, CrewAI, Others)	Yes	`@protect` for anything in-process; the adapter contract with OpenAI Agents SDK and LangGraph reference adapters, each routing an `approve` through the framework’s own interrupt; the OWASP Agent Control Standard adapter (ACS).	v0.1, v0.2, v0.5

Augment & Fine Tune Data

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Detect usage of poisoned models in training pipelines	No	Out of scope.	none
Apply PII & Sensitive data masking injected into agent components	No	Out of scope. Raw resource state never reaches a receipt, because a precondition fingerprint is hashed through the canonicalizer, but that is evidence hygiene, not masking.	none
Apply differential privacy or obfuscation on sensitive data injected into agent memory	No	Out of scope.	none
Data masking on structured data	No	Out of scope.	none
Agent Action Audit	Yes	Every consequential action leaves a receipt naming the principal, the action hash, the decision, the approval and the outcome; `ctrlrun inspect <action_id>` reads one; the chain detects alteration (`G11`) and, with the external anchor, truncation and append.	v0.1, v0.6, v0.11

Test & Evaluate

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Agent Penetration Testing	No	CTRLRun tests its own guarantees against your configuration. It does not attack your agent.	none
Adversarial red-teaming: goal drift, prompt injection, hallucination chaining, & over-permissioned tool usage	Partly	`ctrlrun verify` exercises mutated and replayed approvals, races across OS processes, escalation on every delegation dimension and a blind retry after a lost response. Over-permissioned tool use is what `ctrlrun scan` and observe mode measure. Nothing here reads a prompt or drifts a goal.	v0.4, v0.3
Multi-agent scenario simulations for collusion, misalignment, or deception detection	No	Out of scope.	none
Validate agent decisions against expected goal plans	No	CTRLRun never sees the plan. It decides actions.	none
Sandboxed testing of all tool calls, code execution, cloud API triggers	No	`verify` runs against fake remotes that count their calls; it is a test of the kernel, not a sandbox for your tools.	none
Available Agent Scanning	Partly	Static: `ctrlrun scan`, the gap between installed and in the path. Runtime: enforcement coverage from events, meaning policy entries never exercised, gateway tools never routed, `@protect` actions never seen. No score, no percentage, no badge, by rule.	v0.6, v0.11

Release

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Generate & verify model + agent + tool SBOMs - shared responsibility	No	CTRLRun ships its own SBOM and signed SLSA provenance for its own releases. It generates nothing for your agent.	none
Register all agents in an internal trust registry	No	A grant names a subject; there is no registry of agents.	none
Sign model weights, plugin manifests, & memory snapshots	No	Out of scope.	none

Deploy

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Apply & manage runtime Guardrails	Partly	Policy at the tool call decides `allow`, `approve` or `deny` for every consequential action, and observe mode reports what would have been refused before anything is. Not input or output filtering, and not moderation; the comparison page says where the line is.	v0.1, v0.3
Rotate all shared secrets, keys, & tokens with ephemeral, scoped credentials	No	CTRLRun issues no credentials and rotates none.	none
Enforce zero-trust policies between agents, tools, & external APIs	Yes	Every action carries a verified principal or does not run (`G7`); authority is evaluated on every action against the clock (`G8`); an unknown action is refused (`G6`); the gateway applies all of it to a tool server that has no idea CTRLRun exists. Between agents: the envelope a second agent receives is a subset of the first agent’s, checked at the hop and on every evaluation.	v0.1, v0.3, v0.10
Configure Inter-agent authorization policies, capabilities, & roles	Yes	Delegation with attenuation (`G9`), task-bound authority (`G24`), authority propagated across A2A hops with depth and expiry, and approver roles from the control registry (`G17`).	v0.3, v0.8, v0.9, v0.10

Monitor

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Audit reflection accuracy by comparing stated & observed planning outcomes	No	CTRLRun never sees a plan or a reflection.	none
Use immutable logs (e.g., Sigstore, Immudb) for forensic readiness	Partly	Tamper-evident, not immutable. Each receipt hashes the one before it, so alteration, deletion and reordering are reported by name and by `seq` (`G11`); the head is anchored outside the database at an interval, so a suffix erased or appended between anchors is detected. Receipts are not signed, and the chain says nothing about who wrote it.	v0.6, v0.11
Alert on anomalies; e.g., goal reversal, unexpected plan depth, adversarial-input, excessive tool usage, or rapid inter-agent chatter	Partly	Excessive use is refused rather than alerted on: a consequence budget on a grant is consumed on reserve and held until an `AMBIGUOUS` effect is reconciled (`G22`), and every refusal is an event on the sink your alerting reads. CTRLRun ships no alerting and sees no plan or prompt.	v0.2, v0.9
Correlate telemetry from agent step tracing, tool execution, & message logs	Yes	The OpenTelemetry sink opens one span per action carrying `ctrlrun.action_id`, `ctrlrun.effect_key` and `ctrlrun.approval_id`, and the receipt carries the same `action_id`, so a tool-execution span joins an agent trace and a receipt on one identifier (export guide).	v0.2

Operate

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
LLM Incident Detection & Response	Partly	Response, not detection: `ctrlrun revoke --by <principal>` and `--under <grant id>` cut everything a principal or a grant issued, idempotently; `ctrlrun resolve` settles an `AMBIGUOUS` effect; break-glass is a recorded, expiring grant, never a flag that skips a check.	v0.3, v0.8
Continuously scan loaded plugins for CVEs & privilege escalation vectors	No	CTRLRun never inspects a package.	none
Runtime guardrails & moderation; anomalous tool use	Partly	An action outside the policy or outside the grant is refused, by name. No moderation, and no model of what is anomalous beyond not permitted.	v0.1, v0.3
Monitor agent memory mutation patterns for drift	No	Out of scope.	none
Detect task replay, infinite delegation, or hallucination loops	Partly	A replayed approval is refused (`G2`), a duplicate effect is refused (`G3`), delegation carries a depth limit across hops, and a task-bound grant is refused on a task it does not name (`G24`). Hallucination loops are not detected; their consequential actions are refused.	v0.1, v0.9, v0.10
Enable human-in-the-loop (HITL) override thresholds on high-risk or ambiguous actions	Yes	An `approve` decision with a condition such as `amount_gt`; the approval bound to the exact action the human saw, single-use, expiring (`G1`, `G2`); an `AMBIGUOUS` effect that only a human or a reconciliation hook may leave (`G5`); the approver a verified principal who is entitled, not the requester, and counted once under M-of-N (`G17`–`G19`).	v0.1, v0.8

Govern

Checkbox	Status	What it means here	Since
Enforce role- & task-based access policies across agent populations & their tool access	Yes	Grants and delegation per principal (`G7`–`G9`), approver roles from the control registry (`G17`), task-bound authority (`G24`), and a budget per grant (`G22`). Across populations is per principal and per grant; a fleet-wide budget across stores is on the roadmap’s do-not-build list.	v0.3, v0.8, v0.9
Align control evidence with frameworks like EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, & ISO/IEC 42001	No	Receipts are the evidence and they are portable JSON. No mapping document from a guarantee to a clause of any of those frameworks exists at 1.0; the roadmap says one is written when a design partner asks. This box stays empty until that document exists and each row of it points at a test.	none
Automate goal alignment audits, including adversarial review of long-term agent memory	No	Out of scope.	none
Automate agent versioning, expiration, & rotation policies	Partly	A grant expires and the action it covered is denied on the next proposal (`G8`); a credential revoked before its `exp` is refused via Shared Signals / CAEP events, consumed and never issued (`G20`). No agent versioning and no rotation.	v0.3, v0.8

Agentic Top 10 coverage

The form asks for ASI01:26 through ASI10:26 as ten checkboxes. The Agentic Top 10 reading carries the row-by-row mapping and the sentence for each entry saying what is not covered; this table is the summary at v1.0, with the version that moved each entry.

Entry	Status	Guarantees	What stays out	Since
`ASI01:26` Agent Goal Hijack	Partly	`G1`, `G6`, `G24`	The hijack itself. A task-bound grant shrinks what a hijacked agent can do; nothing reads the hijack.	v0.1, v0.9
`ASI02:26` Tool Misuse	Yes	`G3`, `G6`, `G16`, `G22`	Misuse that stays inside the policy, the grant and the budget.	v0.1, v0.7, v0.9
`ASI03:26` Identity & Privilege Abuse	Yes	`G7`, `G8`, `G9`, `G17`–`G20`	Issuing identity. CTRLRun verifies what it is handed.	v0.3, v0.8
`ASI04:26` Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities	Partly	upstream identity pinning	Provenance at large. A pinned TLS key or tool-schema hash refuses a swapped upstream; no package, model or registry is ever inspected.	v0.10
`ASI05:26` Unexpected Code Execution	No	none	Out of scope: nothing here sandboxes an interpreter.	none
`ASI06:26` Memory & Context Poisoning	Partly	`G1`, `G6`, `G16`, `G23`	The poisoning. A scope provider now bites on an identifier an attacker chose, fetched before the reservation and fail-closed; the recheck still cannot run inside the atomic write, and that residual gap is stated wherever the feature is.	v0.1, v0.7, v0.9
`ASI07:26` Insecure Inter-Agent Communication	Partly	hop propagation	Transport security. Authority across an A2A hop is a subset of the sender’s, checked at the hop and on every evaluation; the channel itself is not CTRLRun’s.	v0.10
`ASI08:26` Cascading Failures	Yes	`G3`, `G4`, `G5`, `G10`, `G12`, `G15`, `G22`	A failure that never reaches a consequential action.	v0.1, v0.7, v0.9
`ASI09:26` Human-Agent Trust Exploitation	Partly	`G1`, `G2`, `G17`, `G18`, `G19`	Persuasion. A human misled into approving the right action for the wrong reason gives a valid approval, and the receipt records it as one.	v0.1, v0.8
`ASI10:26` Rogue Agents	Partly	`G8`, `G9`, `G20`, `G22`, `G24`	Detection. A rogue agent is bounded, expired and revoked; it is not recognised as rogue.	v0.3, v0.8, v0.9

What this page is for

A submission to the landscape is filled in from this page and from nothing else, so that every ticked box has a row here and every row points at something that runs. If a box is ticked on the form and its row here says No, the form is wrong. If a guarantee behind a Yes loses its test, the row becomes Partly or No in the same commit, on the rule the Agentic Top 10 reading already follows. This page is regenerated when the guarantee catalogue changes, when a version named in a Since column is tagged, and when OWASP revises the form. It was written against ctrlrun.guarantees/v5 as the roadmap defines it for v0.9 and the form as read on 2026-09-10.

OWASP Agentic Top 10: the row-by-row mapping this summary is drawn from.
Verify: how each guarantee is checked against your configuration, and why not applicable is not a pass.
Why CTRLRun and Get started.

Architecture

Security

Standards

Project

OWASP Agentic Solutions Landscape

What was read, and against which version

Lifecycle stages

Capabilities, checkbox by checkbox

Scope & Plan

Develop & Experiment

Augment & Fine Tune Data

Test & Evaluate

Release

Deploy

Monitor

Operate

Govern

Agentic Top 10 coverage

What this page is for

Next

​What was read, and against which version

​Lifecycle stages

​Capabilities, checkbox by checkbox

​Scope & Plan

​Develop & Experiment

​Augment & Fine Tune Data

​Test & Evaluate

​Release

​Deploy

​Monitor

​Operate

​Govern

​Agentic Top 10 coverage

​What this page is for

​Next

What was read, and against which version

Lifecycle stages

Capabilities, checkbox by checkbox

Scope & Plan

Develop & Experiment

Augment & Fine Tune Data

Test & Evaluate

Release

Deploy

Monitor

Operate

Govern

Agentic Top 10 coverage

What this page is for

Next