IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,608,476
Granted Patent B1
US 12,608,476 · App. 19/404,229 · Granted Apr 21, 2026

Neural override verification and constraint architecture for sovereign AGI execution at driver, firmware, and hypervisor gateways

Inventor: Yong Bok Lee (Sheridan, WY)
Assignee: THE CROWN AND THE CROSS LLC
G06F21/57G06F21/602G06N5/04G06F2221/034
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,608,476
App. No.
19/404,229
Filed
Dec 1, 2025
Granted
Apr 21, 2026
Kind
B1
Art Unit
2407
USPC
726/14
Abstract

NOVACOV enforces a fail-closed, permit-before-action control path for autonomous agents. At deployment, agent logic is sealed as an Immutable Constraint Chain (ICC) anchored in an append-only verifiable log that publishes signed heads. At runtime, a read-only Encrypted Logic Vault (ELV) performs verify-to-activation by validating inclusion and append-only-evolution (consistency) proofs under a freshness policy, constructing a behavioral profile for each request, and comparing the profile to the ICC. A Purpose Enforcement Kernel (PEK) checks alignment against a Mission Identity Template (MIT), and a licensing gate (GLG) verifies license tier and an m-of-n quorum. On PASS, the system mints a short-lived, audience-bound permit, records it in an Immutable Arbitration Ledger (IAL), and requires the permit identifier prior to device I/O or network egress; otherwise, the gate returns a structured disposition selected from HOLD, QUARANTINE, DENY, or ESCALATE and enforces anti-replay and Override Signature Denial Engine (OSDE)-based replay/mimicry denial.

Claims (27)

1 . A system comprising one or more processors and a non-transitory memory storing instructions that, when executed, cause the system to enforce a fail-closed verify-to-activation gate for an AI (artificial intelligence) agent by: (a) encoding deployment logic into an Immutable Constraint Chain (ICC) and anchoring a commitment in an append-only verifiable log that publishes signed heads; at runtime, within a read-only Encrypted Logic Vault (ELV), verifying inclusion relative to a current signed head under a freshness policy and, upon head advance, verifying append-only-evolution (consistency) from a previously observed head; (b) verifying license authority at a licensing gate (GLG) including a license-tier check and an m-of-n quorum; (c) responsive to (a)-(b) passing, minting a short-lived, audience-bound permit, recording a permit record in an Immutable Arbitration Ledger (IAL), and requiring a valid, unexpired, and unrevoked permit identifier prior to any device I/O or network egress; otherwise failing closed with a structured disposition selected from HOLD, QUARANTINE, DENY, or ESCALATE; wherein (i) absence, expiration, or revocation of the permit identifier results in DENY, and (ii) each evaluation binds a nonce and a monotonic counter to form a concurrency-prevention tuple; and (d) enforcing the requirement of (c) at an implementation hook selected from: (i) a kernel-mode driver path prior to doorbell or queue submission to an accelerator, (ii) a device-firmware microcode path prior to dispatch, or (iii) a hypervisor intercept path for VM-exit or network egress, thereby denying actuation absent a valid permit identifier.

2 . The system of claim 1 , wherein, within the ELV, the system generates, for each execution request, a behavioral profile comprising at least a behavioral index, a temporal context, an instruction class, and an entropy-slope metric, and compares the profile to the ICC.

3 . The system of claim 1 , wherein purpose alignment is verified using a Purpose Enforcement Kernel (PEK) against a Mission Identity Template (MIT).

4 . The system of claim 1 , wherein two or more independent append-only verifiable logs are required and disagreement maps to HOLD until continuity is proven.

5 . The system of claim 4 , wherein the required independent append-only verifiable logs each publish a signed head validated at runtime.

6 . The system of claim 1 , wherein at least one witness co-signature on a current signed head is validated prior to inclusion or consistency checks.

7 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the freshness policy enforces a maximum-merge-delay (MMD) and an MMD exceedance maps to HOLD or DENY until continuity is proven.

8 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the permit is lease-based with a refresh-by window, and a missed refresh maps to HOLD and, if unremedied within a policy window, to DENY.

9 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the permit is audience-bound to at least one of an agent identifier, a tenant identifier, or a mission identifier, and includes an expiration.

10 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the system rejects a permit whose canonicalization or context label does not match a configured value.

11 . The system of claim 1 , wherein a signature on the permit binds at least an ICC head identifier, a signed-head identifier, a license-tier identifier, an expiration, an audience binding, the nonce, and the monotonic counter.

12 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the ELV is read-only post-deployment and attempts to mutate sealed logic are denied and mirrored to the IAL.

13 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising an Override Signature Denial Engine (OSDE) that rejects replay or mimicry using a signature-entropy correlation.

14 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising a Global Override Cascade Trigger (GOCT) that halts execution across nodes and appends a lockdown tag in the IAL.

15 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the GLG requires validation of an ELV attestation quote prior to permit issuance, the quote comprising a measurement/image hash, a version/PCR register set, and a signature/certificate chain, and permit issuance is denied upon quote-validation failure.

16 . The system of claim 1 , further comprising a Recursive Moral Drift Monitor (RMDM) that maintains rolling, windowed drift counters to compute a drift index, compares the drift index to a policy threshold, and, responsive to threshold breach, suspends privileges by preventing permit issuance, revoking an active permit, or both, thereby causing subsequent agent actions to fail closed prior to device I/O or network egress at the driver/firmware/hypervisor intercept.

17 . The system of claim 1 , wherein driver-path denial occurs prior to doorbell or queue submission to an accelerator.

18 . The system of claim 1 , wherein permit verification occurs in device-firmware microcode prior to dispatch.

19 . The system of claim 1 , wherein permit verification occurs in a hypervisor intercept path, and the hypervisor intercept path denies VM-exit or network egress absent a valid permit identifier.

20 . The system of claim 1 , wherein HOLD auto-expires absent proof of continuity.

21 . The system of claim 1 , wherein a record in the Immutable Arbitration Ledger (IAL) further includes evidence-only references to one or more external artifacts, wherein the system exports an evidence-only bundle comprising at least the permit identifier and a signed-head identifier, and wherein gate predicate evaluation is independent of the presence or absence of the external artifacts.

22 . The system of claim 1 , wherein an analytics module is configured to generate, for a reporting period, aggregated, privacy-preserving statistics derived from IAL records, and wherein the statistics are identified by at least a reporting-period identifier.

23 . A computer-implemented method of fail-closed gating for an AI (artificial intelligence) agent, comprising: anchoring an ICC commitment to an append-only verifiable log that publishes signed heads; at runtime in an ELV, verifying freshness and inclusion relative to a current signed head under a freshness policy and, responsive to a head advance, verifying an append-only-evolution (consistency) proof, verifying license tier and an m-of-n quorum at a licensing gate (GLG); minting and recording a short-lived, audience-bound permit in an Immutable Arbitration Ledger (IAL); requiring the permit identifier before device I/O or network egress at a driver, firmware, or hypervisor intercept; responsive to absence, expiration, or revocation of the permit, setting a structured disposition to DENY; binding, for each decision, a nonce and a monotonic counter to form a concurrency-prevention tuple that is required to be unique per evaluation and is rejected upon reuse; and auto-expiring a HOLD disposition absent proof of continuity, and

enforcing an implementation hook selected from: (i) a kernel-mode driver path prior to doorbell or queue submission to an accelerator, (ii) a device-firmware microcode path prior to dispatch, or (iii) a hypervisor intercept path for VM-exit or network egress, thereby denying actuation absent a valid permit identifier.

24 . The method of claim 23 , further comprising validating at least one witness co-signature on the current signed head prior to inclusion or consistency checks.

25 . The method of claim 23 , wherein two independent append-only verifiable logs are required and a head conflict between the logs maps to HOLD with a conflict record in the IAL.

26 . A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform the method of claim 23 .

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 1, 2025
From: LEE, YONG BOK
To: THE CROWN AND THE CROSS LLC
Reel/Frame 073066/0760 →
Continuity (2)
Continuation 19183800 · Apr 19, 2025
Provisional Application 63776231 · Mar 23, 2025
References Cited (11)
US 11949794B2 · Brandenburger et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20190095879A1 · Eyal et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20230092716A1 · Stephenson · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20230360157A1 · De Brouwer · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20250077634A1 · Beecham · 2025 [cited by applicant]
US 20250124156A1 · Beecham · 2025 [cited by applicant]
Rudin, C., “Stop explaining black box ML models . . . ,” Nature Mach. Intell., vol. 1, 2019, pp. 206-215. [cited by applicant]
Jana, A. et al., “Secure Neural Networks for Biometric Auth.,” PoPETs 2022, pp. 1-20, De Gruyter. [cited by applicant]
Ienca, M.; Haselager, P., “Hacking the brain: BCI tech and ethics of neurosecurity,” Ethics Inf. Technol., vol. 18, No. 2, 2016, pp. 117-129. [cited by applicant]
Yousefi, F.; Kolivand, H., “Brain Signals for BCI Auth.,” Encyclopedia of Comp. Graphics & Games, Springer, 2020. [cited by applicant]
European Commission, “AI Act,” Off. J. Eur. Union, COM/2021/206 final, 2021. [cited by applicant]