Skip to content

Add SAFE-Framework sandbox proposal#561

Merged
steiza merged 1 commit intoossf:mainfrom
fkautz:safe-framework-sandbox
Mar 4, 2026
Merged

Add SAFE-Framework sandbox proposal#561
steiza merged 1 commit intoossf:mainfrom
fkautz:safe-framework-sandbox

Conversation

@fkautz
Copy link
Contributor

@fkautz fkautz commented Jan 12, 2026

Summary

  • Add SAFE-Framework sandbox application doc
  • Add SAFE-Framework to the Projects table

@fkautz fkautz requested a review from a team as a code owner January 12, 2026 20:33
Signed-off-by: Frederick F. Kautz IV <fkautz@alumni.cmu.edu>
@fkautz fkautz force-pushed the safe-framework-sandbox branch from 4aac3c2 to eb445c4 Compare January 12, 2026 20:35
Copy link
Member

@mihaimaruseac mihaimaruseac left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for filing the application!

Copy link
Contributor

@marcelamelara marcelamelara left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @fkautz !


### Mission of the project
The project must be aligned with the OpenSSF mission and either be a novel approach for existing areas, address an unfulfilled need, or be initial code needed for OpenSSF WG work. It is preferred that extensions of existing OpenSSF projects collaborate with the existing project rather than seek a new project.
* SAFE-Framework provides a shared security framework for Agentic AI systems, focusing on the real-world side effects of autonomous actions, tool use, and model-to-model interactions. It catalogs tactics and techniques for agentic failure modes and security abuse, and offers guidance for mitigation and detection so builders can assess and reduce risk before deployment.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To confirm, SAFE-MCP is a specification/framework, not a software project, right? Is there any intent to provide software at some future point?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same question - the reason we want to work this out now is if there isn't an intent to develop software as part of SAFE Framework it should probably be a SIG instead of a Project.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It'd be good to know but if the intent is to produce a spec it should still be a Project. We used to have spec work take place in SIGs but we changed that.

From the SIG lifecycle:

If the SIG starts to produce code or specifications, they should consider becoming a project instead, especially if this becomes the main scope of the SIG.

@gkunz gkunz added the Major / New TI Changes to Charter/Technical Strategy/TI Lifecycle process, new TI. Needs 7 approvals, 15d review. label Jan 20, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@bobcallaway bobcallaway left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it would be good to see closer alignment with other projects within the AI/ML Security WG as time goes on.

@TracyRagan
Copy link

It may be a bit early to formalize this as a full project. A more measured approach could be to begin as a Special Interest Group (SIG), allowing the community to explore the scope, clarify objectives, and demonstrate tangible outcomes. As deliverables become more clearly defined and sustained contributions take shape, transitioning to project status would likely be a natural and well-supported next step. This path provides space for thoughtful development while ensuring the structure aligns with what is ultimately produced.

@mlieberman85
Copy link
Contributor

It may be a bit early to formalize this as a full project. A more measured approach could be to begin as a Special Interest Group (SIG), allowing the community to explore the scope, clarify objectives, and demonstrate tangible outcomes. As deliverables become more clearly defined and sustained contributions take shape, transitioning to project status would likely be a natural and well-supported next step. This path provides space for thoughtful development while ensuring the structure aligns with what is ultimately produced.

Just FYI, this is already an existing project looking to be adopted, more so than an entirely new initiative without existing content. See: https://www.safemcp.org/ and https://github.com/SAFE-MCP/safe-mcp

@steiza steiza merged commit d339328 into ossf:main Mar 4, 2026
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Major / New TI Changes to Charter/Technical Strategy/TI Lifecycle process, new TI. Needs 7 approvals, 15d review.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants