morluto/rea

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/morluto/rea.git synced 2026-11-05 06:45:22 +00:00

[GH-ISSUE #2120] [Design] Copyright compliance concerns regarding agent access to original source code #692

New issue

Open

opened 2026-10-15 18:27:27 +00:00 by bsakaguchi · 1 comment

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-15 18:27:27 +00:00

Owner

Originally created by @homulilly323 on GitHub (Oct 12, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/2120

Before submitting

I searched the open and closed issues and pull requests for a related proposal.
I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data.

Background

REA enables AI agents to reverse-engineer software without requiring access to its original source code.

However, when the target software has a publicly accessible source repository, the current workflow does not appear to guarantee that an agent will refrain from accessing or searching for that source code through other available tools or channels.

As illustrated by #254 (Skip binary-tool setup for source-repository analysis), REA's current agent workflow distinguishes between source-repository analysis and binary/runtime reverse engineering, allowing agents to use ordinary source inspection tools when complete source code is available.

While this is reasonable from a technical efficiency perspective, the availability of source code does not necessarily mean that accessing it is appropriate for every use case, particularly where the user intends to demonstrate independent development without exposure to the original source code.

This raises a potential copyright compliance concern for users who wish to employ REA in more legally sensitive reverse-engineering and independent software development scenarios.

Copyright Compliance Concern

In software copyright infringement disputes, access to the original work and substantial similarity are important considerations in many jurisdictions.

While substantial similarity may be difficult to rule out when AI agents independently generate implementations of similar functionality, restricting access to the original source code can be an important measure for reducing copyright risks and supporting claims of independent development.

However, the current design does not appear to provide sufficient assurances that an agent using REA has not accessed publicly available original source code during its investigation or subsequent implementation.

Consequently, even when a user intends to conduct source-free reverse engineering, the possibility of unintended source-code access may undermine the evidentiary value of that process in a future copyright dispute.

Of course, preventing access to source code alone does not guarantee copyright compliance, and the legal assessment will depend on the applicable jurisdiction and circumstances.

Request for Consideration

Would the maintainers consider whether REA should support a stricter copyright-conscious mode for users who require stronger assurances regarding an agent's non-access to original source code?

I recognize that some aspects of agent behavior and access control may fall outside REA's own scope.

I am raising this primarily as a copyright compliance concern and a potential requirement for more legally sensitive use cases, rather than proposing a specific technical implementation.

I would appreciate the maintainers' views on whether this concern falls within REA's intended scope.

Originally created by @homulilly323 on GitHub (Oct 12, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/2120 ### Before submitting - [x] I searched the open and closed issues and pull requests for a related proposal. - [x] I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data. Background REA enables AI agents to reverse-engineer software without requiring access to its original source code. However, when the target software has a publicly accessible source repository, the current workflow does not appear to guarantee that an agent will refrain from accessing or searching for that source code through other available tools or channels. As illustrated by **#254 (Skip binary-tool setup for source-repository analysis)**, REA's current agent workflow distinguishes between source-repository analysis and binary/runtime reverse engineering, allowing agents to use ordinary source inspection tools when complete source code is available. While this is reasonable from a technical efficiency perspective, the availability of source code does not necessarily mean that accessing it is appropriate for every use case, particularly where the user intends to demonstrate independent development without exposure to the original source code. This raises a potential copyright compliance concern for users who wish to employ REA in more legally sensitive reverse-engineering and independent software development scenarios. ## Copyright Compliance Concern In software copyright infringement disputes, **access to the original work and substantial similarity** are important considerations in many jurisdictions. While substantial similarity may be difficult to rule out when AI agents independently generate implementations of similar functionality, restricting access to the original source code can be an important measure for reducing copyright risks and supporting claims of independent development. However, the current design does not appear to provide sufficient assurances that an agent using REA has not accessed publicly available original source code during its investigation or subsequent implementation. Consequently, even when a user intends to conduct source-free reverse engineering, the possibility of unintended source-code access may undermine the evidentiary value of that process in a future copyright dispute. Of course, preventing access to source code alone does not guarantee copyright compliance, and the legal assessment will depend on the applicable jurisdiction and circumstances. ## Request for Consideration Would the maintainers consider whether REA should support a **stricter copyright-conscious mode** for users who require stronger assurances regarding an agent's non-access to original source code? I recognize that some aspects of agent behavior and access control may fall outside REA's own scope. I am raising this primarily as a copyright compliance concern and a potential requirement for more legally sensitive use cases, rather than proposing a specific technical implementation. I would appreciate the maintainers' views on whether this concern falls within REA's intended scope.

bsakaguchi added the

labels

2026-10-15 18:27:27 +00:00

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-15 18:27:27 +00:00

Author

Owner

@matbrgz commented on GitHub (Oct 12, 2026):

Design & Clean-Room Governance Notes

Addressing copyright compliance and clean-room engineering boundaries is a critical operational consideration when deploying AI agents for reverse engineering:

Clean-Room Boundary Guarantees: When an analyst mandates a clean-room specification workflow (Chinese Wall / Clean Room Design), the agent exploring the binary with REA must be strictly prevented from fetching original upstream source repositories or training data to avoid copyright taint.
Agent Skill & Mode Constraints: As noted in #2187, project-local scoping (--scope local) combined with an explicit --clean-room mode in REA skill guidance can instruct orchestrators to isolate specification-producing agents from implementation-writing agents, ensuring evidence provenance is strictly derived from binary observation.

@matbrgz commented on GitHub (Oct 12, 2026): ### Design & Clean-Room Governance Notes Addressing copyright compliance and clean-room engineering boundaries is a critical operational consideration when deploying AI agents for reverse engineering: - **Clean-Room Boundary Guarantees:** When an analyst mandates a clean-room specification workflow (Chinese Wall / Clean Room Design), the agent exploring the binary with REA must be strictly prevented from fetching original upstream source repositories or training data to avoid copyright taint. - **Agent Skill & Mode Constraints:** As noted in #2187, project-local scoping (`--scope local`) combined with an explicit `--clean-room` mode in REA skill guidance can instruct orchestrators to isolate specification-producing agents from implementation-writing agents, ensuring evidence provenance is strictly derived from binary observation.

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-10-16 21:15:12 +00:00

[PR #692] [MERGED] fix(reference): classify test suffixes before extensions #2173

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-10-16 21:15:13 +00:00

[PR #694] [MERGED] fix(reference): bound Dockerfile language detection #2174

bsakaguchi added

enhancement

and removed

enhancement

labels

2026-10-31 00:29:27 +00:00