mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-10-07 07:23:08 +02:00
Nicky LeachandPaperclip
949e975b0f
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work > - Sandbox providers run agent work in isolated environments > - The Daytona documents described a command wrapper that the provider no longer uses > - Those documents therefore described a control that the code does not have > - This pull request states the real sandbox boundary and the controls for paths that cross it > - The benefit is accurate security guidance for sandbox provider authors and operators ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **Issue type** Outdated (no longer matches behavior). **Where is the issue?** `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/SANDBOX-REQUIREMENTS.md` and `packages/plugins/sandbox-providers/daytona/README.md`. **What's wrong?** The Daytona provider no longer uses the documented command wrapper, package installation commands, or sudoers rule. The requirements document also lacked a clear statement of the sandbox security boundary. **Suggested fix** State that the sandbox provides the boundary. Name outbound workspace synchronization and the application programming interface bridge as the paths that cross the boundary. State that a provider must not map a host path into a sandbox synchronization path. ## What Changed - Replace stale wrapper requirements with the actual sandbox security boundary. - State the controls that apply to outbound workspace synchronization and the application programming interface bridge. - State that this repository does not enforce the provider path-mapping duty today. - Remove obsolete Daytona package-install commands and the sudoers rule. ## Verification - Confirm the difference contains the two documentation files and the test file changed by the follow-up fix. - Confirm that no unrelated source, configuration, or fixture file appears in the difference. - Run the repository continuous integration checks and confirm that every required check passes. - Run the repository review bot and confirm its final verdict. ## Risks Low risk. This pull request changes two documents and closes a database client in one integration test. It does not change product runtime behavior or configuration. ## Model Used OpenAI Codex, GPT-5, with tool use and code execution. The model produced the documentation change and the pull request text. ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes: #` / `Refs: #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run the affected test locally; continuous integration provides complete test verification. - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [x] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [x] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge --------- Co-authored-by: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>