draft-das-execution-finality-ai-interoperability-00 - Breaking the Apple-Siri EU DMA Deadlock Without Sacrificing Privacy or Security
Skip to main content
Javascript disabled? Like other modern websites, the IETF Datatracker relies on Javascript.<br>Please enable Javascript for full functionality.
Breaking the Apple-Siri EU DMA Deadlock Without Sacrificing Privacy or Security
draft-das-execution-finality-ai-interoperability-00
Status
Email expansions
History
Versions:
This document is an Internet-Draft (I-D).<br>Anyone may submit an I-D to the IETF.<br>This I-D is not endorsed by the IETF and has no formal standing in the<br>IETF standards process.
Document<br>Type
Active Internet-Draft<br>(individual)
Author
Sangam Das
Last updated
2026-08-19
RFC stream
(None)
Intended RFC status
(None)
Formats
txt
htmlized
bibtex
bibxml
Stream
Stream state
(No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate
Unknown
RFC Editor Note
(None)
IESG
IESG state
I-D Exists
Telechat date
(None)
Responsible AD
(None)
Send notices to
(None)
Email authors
IPR
References
Referenced by
Nits
Nits v3
Search email archive
draft-das-execution-finality-ai-interoperability-00
Internet Engineering Task Force Sangam Das<br>Internet-Draft: draft-das-execution-finality-ai-interoperability-00<br>Intended status: Informational August 19, 2026<br>Expires: February 19, 2027
Breaking the Apple-Siri EU DMA Deadlock Without<br>Sacrificing Privacy or Security
Author: Sangam Das<br>Affiliation: Independent Inventor<br>Location: Balasore, Odisha, India<br>Email: info@sangamdas.com
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the<br>provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering<br>Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that<br>other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-<br>Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months<br>and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any<br>time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference<br>material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at<br>https://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at<br>https://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the<br>document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal<br>Provisions Relating to IETF Documents<br>(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of<br>publication of this document. Please review these documents<br>carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect<br>to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must<br>include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the<br>Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described<br>in the Simplified BSD License.
Abstract
The Apple-Siri interoperability debate under the EU Digital Markets Act exposes a difficult technical question: how can third-party AI assistants gain meaningful access to device functions without forcing the platform to surrender privacy, security, or control over consequential actions?
This paper proposes an execution-finality architecture in which an AI assistant may request an action, but the request itself has no power to make that action effective. Each consequential operation remains in a Non-Effective State until protected infrastructure validates the requester, resource, destination, user intent where required, freshness, revocation state, and policy conditions.
Only then is narrowly scoped, non-bearer execution authority created. At the Finality Sink - the first boundary where the action can become externally effective - the system independently verifies that the real operation still matches what was authorized. Any mismatch, replay, substitution, expiry, or revocation causes fail-closed denial.
The key principle is simple:
Interoperability should grant participation, not uncontrolled execution authority.
This offers a possible technical path through the DMA deadlock: third-party assistants could participate meaningfully without requiring broad reusable permissions, while platforms retain strong privacy, security, revocation, anti-replay, and final-effect controls.
Execution-Finality Governance therefore reframes the problem from closed versus open to open participation with bounded, verifiable authority.
Table of Contents
1. Combined Technical Disclosure and Anticipatory Technical Objections<br>2. Security-Focused Layman Explanation of Third-Party AI Interoperability<br>3. Technical Objections and Responses<br>4. Security Considerations<br>5. IANA Considerations<br>6. Author's Address
EXECUTION-FINALITY ARCHITECTURE FOR AI INTEROPERABILITY
Combined Technical Disclosure and Anticipatory Technical Objections and Responses
PART I - TECHNICAL...