Identity suspension versus grant revocation

Treat actor suspension and permission withdrawal as separate operations.

01 / The difference

Two facts that must stay separate

An agent credential is compromised while its task grant also has three child delegates.

Established fact

Treat actor suspension and permission withdrawal as separate operations.

Remaining decision

Suspend the credential to stop that actor; revoke the parent grant to stop descendants and alternate credentials.

Trace the authority boundary
  1. 01Owner
  2. 02Agent + workload
  3. 03Task context
  4. 04Action decision

02 / Decision boundary

Put the check where it can stop the effect.

Suspend the credential to stop that actor; revoke the parent grant to stop descendants and alternate credentials.

03 / Failure and evidence

What goes wrong, and what can be proven?

Failure mode

Operators suspend one token and assume every delegated child is invalid.

Evidence to retain

Capture both state transitions, propagation, denied calls and in-flight effects.

04 / Canonical scope

Why this reference stands alone

Authority revocation explains the grant lifecycle; this page compares it with identity suspension.

Technical artifact

Two independent state transitions

Conceptual trace
agent A credential compromised → suspend identity A
parent grant G still has child B → B may remain valid
revoke G → B must be denied
restoring A identity does not revive revoked G

Run the denial test

Suspend only A and attempt an action through B. Then revoke G and repeat; the second attempt must fail even if B has an unexpired credential.

Primary references

Read the underlying material

Architecture discussion

Choose one consequential action and make its boundary explicit.

Request a Conversation