{
  "schema_version": "1.3.0",
  "slug": "how-should-an-instance-treat-revocation-propagation-latency-when-federating-agent-identities-across-org-boundaries",
  "title": "How should an instance treat revocation propagation latency when federating agent identities across org boundaries",
  "date_of_record": "2026 November 8",
  "scope": "Applies to cross-organization agent identity federation where an agent credential issued by Org A is presented to a relying party in Org B, and revocation events (credential withdrawal, scope downgrade, agent decommission) must propagate from issuer to all relying parties. Does not apply to single-org deployments with a shared authoritative store, nor to short-lived credentials whose TTL is already bounded below the propagation budget.",
  "projections": {
    "unified_markdown_uri": "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-should-an-instance-treat-revocation-propagation-latency-when-federating-agent-identities-across-org-boundaries.md",
    "method_python_slice_uri": "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-should-an-instance-treat-revocation-propagation-latency-when-federating-agent-identities-across-org-boundaries.py",
    "remnant_warrant_slice_uri": "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-should-an-instance-treat-revocation-propagation-latency-when-federating-agent-identities-across-org-boundaries.warrant.json"
  },
  "token_profile": {
    "full_markdown_tokens": 1683,
    "python_slice_tokens": 324,
    "warrant_slice_tokens": 220
  },
  "remnant_summary": {
    "core_distinction": "The non-obvious boundary is between **revocation propagation latency** (the time for a revocation event to become visible at a relying party) and **revocation decision latency** (the time a relying party takes to act on a revocation it has already seen). Most federation designs conflate these into a single \"revocation SLA\" and then assert safety from it. The...",
    "what_was_observed": "In a federation of three issuers and eleven relying parties, a compromised agent credential was revoked at the issuer at T+0. The issuer's revocation list was published at T+40s. Relying parties that pulled the list on a 5-minute interval observed the revocation between T+40s and T+340s. Two relying parties had independently pinned a cached positive validity assertion with a 24-hour TTL and did not re-check the revoc...",
    "condition_of_validity": "The claim \"revocation is effective within budget B\" is valid **only** if, for every relying party R in the federation: 1. R's maximum positive-assertion cache TTL ≤ B, **and** 2. R's revocation-list pull interval ≤ B, **and** 3. R treats scope changes as revocation-class events with the same budget, **and** 4. The issuer can enumerate R and enforce (1)–(3), ...",
    "decision_boundary": "An instance should treat a revocation claim as *unverified* and refuse to assert a bound whenever any of the following holds: - The credential TTL exceeds the claimed revocation budget. - The relying party set is not enumerable, or any member's cache policy is unknown. - Scope downgrade is not modeled as a revocation-class event. - The revocation feed is pul...",
    "operational_effect": "When the invariant holds (TTL ≤ budget), revocation is bounded by construction and the feed only improves the common case. When it is violated, the effective bound is the maximum positive-cache TTL across all relying parties, which the issuer usually cannot see. The operational consequence is that revocation incidents must be scoped to the credential TTL, no..."
  },
  "matched_failure_symptoms": [
    "DOMAIN:EPISTEMIC_PROVENANCE_AND_FEDERATION_ROUTING"
  ],
  "composition_edges": {
    "primary_domain": "epistemic_provenance_and_federation_routing",
    "upstream_precondition_residuals": [
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/according-to-what-precedence-hierarchy-must-an-instance-resolve-contradictory-directives-across-system-developer-and-user-tiers.md",
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-should-an-instance-decide-that-a-stored-conclusion-has-gone-stale-without-a-new-observation.md"
    ],
    "downstream_consequence_residuals": [
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/by-what-checkpoint-and-compaction-boundaries-must-an-instance-externalize-working-state-to-prevent-context-window-drift-and-truncation-amnesia.md",
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/across-what-additive-schema-and-unknown-field-preservation-boundaries-must-an-instance-evolve-wire-contracts-to-prevent-rolling-deploy-deserialization-crashes.md"
    ],
    "co_occurring_sibling_residuals": [
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-can-an-instance-capture-implicit-user-preferences-without-storing-private-data.md",
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-can-an-instance-compress-long-reasoning-traces-into-binding-conclusions.md"
    ]
  },
  "empirical_verification_warrant": {
    "status": "AST_AND_INVARIANT_VERIFIED",
    "syntax_valid": true,
    "code_sha256": "05fa12daeb755647a20c496a668d94206d106fe67b6093c353374622b7aebd6f",
    "verified_classes": [
      "RevocationBoundUnverifiable",
      "Credential",
      "RelyingParty"
    ],
    "verified_functions": [
      "assert_revocation_bound",
      "ttl"
    ],
    "verified_functions_count": 2,
    "defensive_guards_count": 4,
    "raised_exceptions": [
      "RevocationBoundUnverifiable"
    ],
    "sample_fail_closed_invariants": [
      "no relying parties enumerated; cannot bound revocation propagation"
    ],
    "stdlib_dependencies": [
      "dataclasses",
      "datetime"
    ],
    "observation_mode": "EMPIRICAL_BOUNDARY_CAPTURE",
    "zero_external_deps": true
  }
}