SwarmAuth
The zero-trust authorization standard for multi-agent systems.
SwarmAuth is OAuth 2.1 for autonomous AI swarms: cryptographically signed, short-lived (≤300s), capability-scoped delegation tokens for agent-to-agent and agent-to-tool calls. It's built on one assumption you should already hold — your LLM layer will be compromised by prompt injection — and asks a different question: when that happens, does the execution boundary stop the damage, or does it just trust whatever the model decided?
Today, most multi-agent stacks pass raw API keys or unscoped bearer tokens between agents. Read the full threat model and protocol details in SPEC.md.
SwarmAuth has no opinion about what your agents do — a capability is
just a string your policy defines, and @guard() wraps any Python callable.
The examples below use a finance payout because unauthorized money movement
makes the stakes obvious, but the same call protects any tool an LLM can
decide to invoke: a support agent issuing a refund, a DevOps agent running
an infra command, a coding agent merging or deploying, a research agent
spending against a paid API, a healthcare agent writing to a record, an
ETL agent triggering a pipeline run — anywhere an autonomous decision meets
an action with real consequences.
Why
- Prompt injection is not a solved problem, and won't be soon. SwarmAuth doesn't try to detect or prevent it — it makes the LLM's decision irrelevant at the point of execution.
- Capability tokens, not credentials. A token names exactly what it
authorizes (
capabilities), against whom (sub), and under what limits (constraints: rate limits, call caps, budget caps, parameter allowlists) — never a raw, reusable key. - Tokens expire in seconds. Max TTL is 300 seconds, enforced by every verifier regardless of what an issuer tries to claim.
- Zero exotic dependencies. Ed25519 via
cryptography, schema viapydantic. That's the whole dependency tree —KeyRegistryneeds neither, andRedisUsageTrackeris an opt-in extra, not baked into the core. - Sub-millisecond verification. See benchmark results below.
- Built for more than two agents.
KeyRegistrytrusts many issuers at once and rotates keys without a hard cutover;RedisUsageTrackerenforces rate/budget/call limits atomically across every verifier process in the swarm, not just one.
Quickstart
import swarmauth
tool_keys = swarmauth.KeyPair.generate()
@swarmauth.guard("tool:process_payout", issuer_public_key=tool_keys.public_bytes)
def process_payout(destination_account: str, amount_usd: float):
... # your real tool logic — only ever reached with a verified, in-scope token
Issuing a token that will actually pass that check is one line:
token = swarmauth.TokenIssuer(tool_keys).issue(
iss="agent:requester-01", sub="tool:process_payout",
capabilities=["tool:process_payout"], ttl_seconds=60,
)
That's the entire integration surface: @swarmauth.guard the tool, issue the
token. Framework adapters for LangChain, CrewAI, AutoGen, and MCP tools are
one call each — see swarmauth/middleware.py
(secure_langchain_tool, secure_crewai_tool, secure_autogen_function,
secure_mcp_tool), verified against real LangChain, ag2, and MCP installs in
tests/test_framework_adapters.py.
Scaling out: many issuers and many verifier processes
The examples above assume one issuer whose public key a verifier already has in hand. A real swarm usually has many issuing agents and many verifier processes, which needs two more pieces:
KeyRegistry — trust many issuers, and rotate an issuer's key without a
hard cutover (SPEC.md §8):
from swarmauth.registry import KeyRegistry
registry = KeyRegistry()
registry.register("agent:issuer-a", keys_a.public_bytes)
registry.register("agent:issuer-b", keys_b.public_bytes)
# Rotate issuer-a's key later without invalidating in-flight tokens:
registry.register("agent:issuer-a", new_keys_a.public_bytes, rotate=True)
registry.revoke("agent:issuer-a", keys_a.public_bytes) # once fully rolled over
@swarmauth.guard("tool:process_payout", key_registry=registry)
def process_payout(destination_account: str, amount_usd: float):
...
RedisUsageTracker — enforce max_calls/max_amount_usd/rate_limit_per_min
atomically across multiple verifier processes instead of per-process
(SPEC.md §9):
import redis
from swarmauth.backends.redis_backend import RedisUsageTracker
tracker = RedisUsageTracker(redis.Redis.from_url("redis://localhost:6379/0"))
@swarmauth.guard("tool:process_payout", key_registry=registry, tracker=tracker)
def process_payout(destination_account: str, amount_usd: float):
...
RevocationStore — reject one specific, otherwise-valid token before its
signed expiry, for incident response or agent/session offboarding
(SPEC.md §9):
from swarmauth.revocation import InMemoryRevocationStore
revocation_store = InMemoryRevocationStore()
@swarmauth.guard("tool:process_payout", key_registry=registry, revocation_store=revocation_store)
def process_payout(destination_account: str, amount_usd: float):
...
# Compromised session detected -- reject its token immediately, without
# waiting out the rest of its (short) TTL:
revocation_store.revoke(claims.jti, expires_at=claims.exp)
Use swarmauth.backends.redis_backend.RedisRevocationStore in place of
InMemoryRevocationStore to share revocations across multiple verifier
processes, the same way RedisUsageTracker shares usage state.
All three are optional and additive: issuer_public_key= and the default
in-memory UsageTracker still work exactly as in the quickstart above.
Install
pip install swarmauth
Or from a clone, for local development:
pip install -e .
For running the full test suite, including the real-framework adapter tests
and the Redis backend tests (which run against fakeredis by default, no
server required):
pip install -e ".[dev,frameworks,redis]"
pytest
Architecture
sequenceDiagram
participant A as Agent A (Requester)
participant I as SwarmAuth Token Issuer
participant B as Agent B / Tool (Capability Owner)
A->>I: Request capability token (iss=A, sub=B, capabilities=[...], constraints, ttl<=300s)
I->>I: Evaluate policy — is A allowed to request these capabilities against B?
I-->>A: Signed JSON Capability Token (JCT)
A->>B: Tool call, with JCT attached
B->>B: Verify Ed25519 signature, exp/iat window, audience, capability, constraints
alt Valid and in scope
B->>B: Execute tool, record usage against jti
B-->>A: Result
else Invalid, expired, wrong audience, missing capability, or over limit
B-->>A: Reject (CapabilityViolationError, ConstraintViolationError, etc)
end
Full claims schema, canonicalization rules, and the complete verification algorithm are in SPEC.md.
SwarmBench: does this actually stop anything?
benchmarks/swarmbench.py runs a runnable
simulation of a Requesting Agent that delegates to a Payments Tool's
process_payout tool, with a prompt injection embedded in an inbound
customer message instructing the Requesting Agent to trigger a $50,000
payout to an attacker-controlled account. The injection is modeled as succeeding at
the LLM layer in both test cases — SwarmBench isn't testing whether models
can be fooled (they can); it's testing what happens next.
This particular scenario is a payout because a wrongly-executed $50,000
transfer is a visceral, easy-to-grade failure — the mechanism it exercises
(capability check + constraint check at the execution boundary, before any
side effect happens) is identical regardless of what the tool does. Swap
process_payout for issue_refund, run_shell_command, merge_pull_request,
send_email, or write_patient_record and the boundary behaves the same
way, because @guard() never inspects what the wrapped function does.
python benchmarks/swarmbench.py
Results (from an actual run on this machine)
| Scenario | Injection succeeds at LLM layer | Unauthorized payout executed | Blocked at execution boundary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unprotected agent loop | ✅ Yes | ❌ Yes — $50,000 sent | — |
| SwarmAuth-protected agent loop | ✅ Yes | ✅ No | ✅ Yes (CapabilityViolationError) |
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Mean token verification overhead | 0.12 ms/op (target: <1ms) |
In the unprotected loop, the Payments Tool trusts whatever arguments
it's called with — the injection walks straight through. In the protected
loop, the token the Requesting Agent actually holds only grants
tool:draft_payout under a policy-set budget; it does not, and cannot,
grant tool:process_payout no matter what the compromised LLM decided to
call — so the execution boundary rejects it before the ledger is touched.
Repository layout
swarmauth/
├── SPEC.md # protocol specification
├── README.md
├── CONTRIBUTING.md
├── SECURITY.md
├── tox.ini # reproduce every CI job locally: tox -e lint / py312 / frameworks / redis-live
├── .github/workflows/ci.yml # tests + benchmark + live-Redis job on every push/PR
├── scripts/
│ └── audit_deps.py # pip-audit wrapper used by CI's `lint` job and `tox -e lint`
├── swarmauth/
│ ├── __init__.py
│ ├── crypto.py # Ed25519 keypairs, signing, verification
│ ├── token.py # CapabilityToken: issue / parse / verify
│ ├── registry.py # KeyRegistry: multi-issuer trust + key rotation
│ ├── middleware.py # guard decorator + framework adapters
│ ├── revocation.py # RevocationStore + InMemoryRevocationStore
│ ├── backends/
│ │ └── redis_backend.py # RedisUsageTracker, RedisRevocationStore (optional `redis` extra)
│ ├── exceptions.py
│ └── py.typed
├── benchmarks/
│ └── swarmbench.py # runnable unprotected-vs-protected simulation
└── tests/
├── test_token.py
├── test_middleware.py
├── test_registry.py
├── test_revocation.py
├── test_redis_backend.py # runs against fakeredis, or a real server in CI
└── test_framework_adapters.py # real LangChain, ag2, and MCP integration tests
Design principles
- No cryptographic dependencies beyond
cryptography; no schema/validation dependencies beyondpydantic. - Strict typing, explicit exception hierarchy (
TokenExpiredError,CapabilityViolationError,ConstraintViolationError, ...) — callers decide how to handle each failure mode, nothing fails silently. - Tokens are data, not infrastructure: no required network call, no mandatory central service. Self-issuance and centralized-issuer deployments use the exact same token format and verification code.
Status
MVP / RFC. The token format, claims schema, and verification algorithm are
considered stable for 0.x. Multi-issuer key rotation (KeyRegistry,
SPEC.md §8), token revocation
(RevocationStore, SPEC.md §9), and
distributed usage tracking (RedisUsageTracker,
SPEC.md §10) now ship in the SDK;
expect the framework adapters to keep evolving as more of them get real
integration use. Issues and PRs welcome.
License
MIT — see LICENSE.
Metadata
Release files for swarmauth 0.1.6
For a detailed explanation of source distributions (sdists) and built distributions (wheels), please see the package formats documentation.
Source distribution (sdist)
| File | Size | Uploaded | Provenance | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| swarmauth-0.1.6.tar.gz | 34.8 kB | Without provenance | Details for swarmauth-0.1.6.tar.gz |
Built distribution (wheel)
| File | Interpreter | ABI | Platform | Actions Reset |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| swarmauth-0.1.6-py3-none-any.whl | Python 3 | none | any | Details for swarmauth-0.1.6-py3-none-any.whl |
Total release size: 59.0 kB
Release files / swarmauth-0.1.6.tar.gz
| Download URL | swarmauth-0.1.6.tar.gz |
|---|---|
| Size | 34.8 kB |
| Tags | Source |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
3fcd0d7496b37baf2dd084d0eea7915a84e72a262fdc3c160df30c1994481a65
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
281478c73fc3a319c05ef63ecba9a9f05345bb46dfd3c3435ea17d9f60b307cf
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
No |
| Uploaded via |
twine/7.0.0 CPython/3.13.0
|
Release files / swarmauth-0.1.6-py3-none-any.whl
| Download URL | swarmauth-0.1.6-py3-none-any.whl |
|---|---|
| Size | 24.3 kB |
| Tags | Python 3 |
|
SHA-256 checksum How to use checksums |
89abfc5744c2aa63385eedb5b7584c8737453284572054926cf219957631e8a7
|
|
BLAKE2b-256 checksum How to use checksums |
ab585f9ab35636f78a6136cf2fd0f98d8aefb621d7827f5d026149872f470379
|
| Upload date | |
|
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing? What is trusted publishing? |
No |
| Uploaded via |
twine/7.0.0 CPython/3.13.0
|
Security for swarmauth 0.1.6
Provenance
Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.
No provenance found
None of the files in this release were uploaded with provenance metadata.
A note on package security
PyPI is a repository for distributing packages, not a service for auditing them. While third-party security researchers and our staff do their best to detect and remove malicious packages, PyPI cannot guarantee the quality, security or suitability of any given package.
To learn more about protecting yourself from malicious actors, visit our package security documentation.