It works great for static credentials. As a product I think about adding couple more things that might be helpful here (Btw I am not the client for this, I just happen to know them as practical problems)
1. Support for OAuth Client credentials - Gateway does the OAuth dance to get the access token, this is quite practical and even useful in case of regular services running across clusters and sharing the same clientId-secretId
2. Support for request retries on certain failures and short circuiting in other cases
1. we support OAuth apps today, and we're growing the catalog based on demand. we support rotating and refreshing tokens for those.
2. I'd like to understand your case better. sitting in the request path means we could own retry mechanisms, but I'm curious what made you think of it, what kind of use cases did you have in mind?
Almost every API caller has to add the logic for retries based on the response codes, centralizing it with the gateway optimizes the repetitive code across the clients.
Trip breaker patterns are good for resource usage on both sides (client and server) when you know things are not working. In addition to that it also saves on cost for the clients if every call is billed irrespective of success or failure.
got it. we have not heard that need from users yet, but, can def see it being usefule as a fallback mechanism, since we are already sit at this network proxy layer.
what type of calls are you aiming to? can share example of that "call is billed.." is that specific apps you have in mind?
This is the same old good way from database world. A db client never touches the disk, but sends requests to a server who owns it. Same in your product. Keys are separated from agents and if needed, agents must send request to a proxy who owns them. Old proven design. Good luck.
yes the agent controls its environment which is exactly why nothing sensitive should live there. The gateway and the real secrets sit outside the sandbox.
that said, not holding the secrets doesn't make the agent harmless. It still acts autonomously, and it can use whatever access those credentials grant.
do you see the second half as the bigger risk? curious how people are thinking about it.
Holy mother of whatever this is, everyone got the same idea again and there’s a bunch of implementations people are desperate to promote in the comments.
You’re just trading one key for another, whatever abstraction you chose to trust, at some point credentials will pass to your llm of the week.
oauth, saml, oidc accomplish the same thing in a way more mature way, so if you’re already using SSO just do that instead of adding another point of failure..
nice launch. i have started to use a secrets manager (infisical) recently for my different projects and it's been really helpful. are your customers solo hackers, small startups or large enterprises that are looking for this kind of solution? i like to see competition in the space
Looks great. The "credential broker" pattern (inject placeholders, replace in proxy) is something we just added to https://varlock.dev (totally free and open source).
Rather than using a dashboard, ours is configured within a .env.schema file, and rather than our own vault, we can pull secrets using our plugins (16 and counting) including Infisical, 1Password, Bitwarden, AWS, GCP, Azure, more. Also very useful for coding tasks in general, as we have integrations for most frameworks, and add built in validation, type safety, leak detection, etc.
Will definitely be keeping an eye on OneCLI to compare notes.
1. Support for OAuth Client credentials - Gateway does the OAuth dance to get the access token, this is quite practical and even useful in case of regular services running across clusters and sharing the same clientId-secretId
2. Support for request retries on certain failures and short circuiting in other cases
1. we support OAuth apps today, and we're growing the catalog based on demand. we support rotating and refreshing tokens for those.
2. I'd like to understand your case better. sitting in the request path means we could own retry mechanisms, but I'm curious what made you think of it, what kind of use cases did you have in mind?
Trip breaker patterns are good for resource usage on both sides (client and server) when you know things are not working. In addition to that it also saves on cost for the clients if every call is billed irrespective of success or failure.
what type of calls are you aiming to? can share example of that "call is billed.." is that specific apps you have in mind?
"Build it and they will come" now works well for competition:
- If you build it (and it is not useful) they won't come.
- If you build it (and it is useful and successful) they will come and copy you to build their own.
You’re just trading one key for another, whatever abstraction you chose to trust, at some point credentials will pass to your llm of the week.
How?
Rather than using a dashboard, ours is configured within a .env.schema file, and rather than our own vault, we can pull secrets using our plugins (16 and counting) including Infisical, 1Password, Bitwarden, AWS, GCP, Azure, more. Also very useful for coding tasks in general, as we have integrations for most frameworks, and add built in validation, type safety, leak detection, etc.
Will definitely be keeping an eye on OneCLI to compare notes.
We added Hashicorp Vault support here: https://github.com/Infisical/agent-vault/pull/256
The idea being that if the fake token leaks from my sandbox - it would be completely useless for an attacker