Governance · Lesson 03 of 03

What Ota can enforce vs what requires a chokepoint

Ota enforces within its execution scope. Anything outside — provider policy, shell orchestration, external systems — requires an adopted chokepoint to be enforceable.

LearnGovernanceAdvanced7 min read1.6.26+2026-08-24

Learning objectives

  • List three things Ota can enforce natively
  • List three things that require an external chokepoint
  • Explain why provider and authority boundaries matter for governance

Prerequisites

Ota can enforce only where execution enters an adopted Ota or provider chokepoint. A contract is canonical policy truth, but a process with unrestricted raw-shell access can route around a CLI it is not required to use.

Three enforcement points

Local Ota execution provides fast admission feedback. Mandatory CI checks decide merge acceptance. Agent harnesses or sandboxes constrain runtime capabilities. The same contract can inform all three without claiming that one surface controls the others automatically.

Real agent-mode refusal boundary
ota run --agent --json deploy

Keep unsupported authority unknown

Ota does not infer verified human identity from non_agent mode, provider attestation from a runner label, or host-global isolation from Unix ownership. Non-Linux protected-launcher carriers, enterprise approvals, and external provider identities require their own trustworthy adapters.

Canonical terminology

enforcementchokepointproviderauthority

Evidence boundary for this lesson

Establishes

  • The worked examples establish the lesson's canonical Ota distinctions for its stated scope.

Does not establish

  • Reading the lesson does not validate a repository, execute its tasks, or establish organizational acceptance.

Knowledge check

Can ota.yaml stop an unrestricted process from invoking raw shell?

No. The contract becomes non-optional only where execution, CI, or an agent harness adopts an enforcing Ota-aware chokepoint.

Relevant specifications