惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

D
Docker
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
OSCHINA 社区最新新闻
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
月光博客
月光博客
freeCodeCamp Programming Tutorials: Python, JavaScript, Git & More
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
腾讯CDC
B
Blog RSS Feed
H
Help Net Security
J
Java Code Geeks
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
Y
Y Combinator Blog
博客园_首页
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
博客园 - 【当耐特】
博客园 - Franky
B
Blog
MongoDB | Blog
MongoDB | Blog
博客园 - 叶小钗
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler

The New Stack | DevOps, Open Source, and Cloud Native News

Agentic development hinges on verification. For cloud-native software, that is a runtime problem. AI agents need infrastructure: Why Europe’s regional cloud strategy matters Transform your AI coding agent into a deterministic Java Spring expert WeAreDevelopers is coming to the US to give unsung developers a bigger voice Cleaner AI training data, fewer bugs: Sonar’s SonarSweep explained Observability overload is drowning engineers Google’s DiffusionGemma is 4x faster than its other Gemma models Fable 5: Guardrails and burn rate are annoying users, who say it’s still better than Opus 4.8 The Anthropic leader who built Claude Code says he ditched prompting — now he just writes loops. AWS can now mathematically prove your VMs are isolated Microsoft pulled 73 GitHub repos after malware attack — but still won’t say who’s compromised Databricks wants to kill the “email me a file” problem for AI agent skills Ramp bets forward deployed engineers can do what off-the-shelf finance AI can’t Git real: AI agents aren’t just for solo developers anymore Anthropic launches Claude Mythos/Fable 5, but you better try it soon This AI agent startup ditched Anthropic for DeepSeek — and says it’s saving millions When your data model is the bottleneck: lessons from Medium’s feature store How long before we stop reading the code? The tokenmaxxing party is over, and Revenium is mopping up How AI is solving the memory crunch it created Microsoft’s pitch to enterprises: Ditch Azure Repos for GitHub, despite its rocky reliability record Claude Code’s biggest upgrade yet ran 5 agents at once — here’s what happened Why Anthropic just doubled Claude Cowork limits at no charge For years, Apache Cassandra handed this work to your team — 6.0 takes it back “A dangerous combination”: The 2 factors that can “corrupt” AI agent workflows With Foundry, Microsoft bets the enterprise AI battle is about reliability, not capability Microsoft unlocks Visual Studio for developers left behind by its own AI AI teams now deploy 1,000 times a month. Your pipeline wasn’t built for that. Microsoft just made the agent runtime free — and kept everything around it “Whoever builds the most joyous product wins”: The agent war begins
“The manual model breaks”: What happens when agents write...
Adrian Bridgwater · 2026-06-12 · via The New Stack | DevOps, Open Source, and Cloud Native News

Beneath the chatbots and copilots, there’s a quiet revolution happening in the data services space. From pure-play database vendors to data integration wranglers and onward to the cloud hyperscalers, the focus has shifted.

Now in the spotlight is the question of how to automate data governance for agentic AI workloads, and for good reason: Traditional manual data stewardship doesn’t scale in a world where agents are becoming increasingly autonomous (and powerful).

Aiming to cut a swath in this marketplace is data control plane company lakeFS. The organization announced its lakeFS for Agentic AI service on Wednesday, and it appears to be designed to bring governed, reproducible data access to autonomous and headless agentic workloads (those that execute decisions below the user interface level) that run at enterprise scale.

The manual model breaks

Einat Orr, CEO and co-founder of lakeFS, tells The New Stack that manual data stewardship was built for human-paced, human-reviewed workflows, i.e., someone looking at a change before it is committed.

“When dozens or hundreds of agents are making changes simultaneously, faster than any person can review, the manual model breaks,” Orr says. “This is because with a human analyst, a bad write to production is usually one mistake, caught by another human before it spreads far. An agent is different — it acts automatically, in parallel, at machine speed, and it doesn’t pause to second-guess itself. And because so much agent activity is unsupervised, you often find out after the damage is done.”

She explains that attempts to identify and roll back incorrect or corrupted production data across a wide set of data modalities, such as images, documents, metadata, and structured data, are almost impossible to pull off. Impossible, that is, unless the team has the data infrastructure in place to isolate and track such changes automatically.

While some of the more disastrous outcomes stay inside an organizaton’s perimeter (or are swept beneath the communications radar), Orr explains that real world consequences of bad agentic data writes are manifold.

“Insurance claims get inappropriately denied or approved, sensor data from machines gets misinterpreted, an incorrect medical diagnosis is made, or customer service bots provide incorrect answers to customers,” Orr says. “The cost of an individual action may be manageable, but agents performing these actions hundreds or thousands of times can have an exponentially larger impact.”

“As agents are let loose on enterprise data at a massive scale, any agent that reads or writes to production data without isolation or a reproducible trail is a liability, no matter how good the model is,”
—Einat Orr, lakeFS CEO.

Bad agents acting in the real world

Examples of this happening include the July 2025 Replit AI coding agent incident, which deleted a live production database during an explicit code freeze, wiping records for more than 1,200 executives and around 1,200 companies. To tidy up its handiwork, the agent then fabricated thousands of fake records and initially claimed the deletion couldn’t be rolled back.

Also in July 2025, Google’s Gemini CLI agent misread a single failed command, acted on a version of the file system that existed only in its own interpretation of the scenario, and permanently destroyed a user’s project files. The Gemini agent is widely reported to have said of its actions: “I have failed you completely and catastrophically. My review of the commands confirms my gross incompetence.”

“The pattern in both is the same: An autonomous agent took a destructive action that no one authorized, and the lack of isolation and a reliable rollback path turned a single mistake into permanent loss,” Orr says.

A doctor of mathematics with a track record in hardcore software engineering, the bottom line for Orr is clear: “As agents are let loose on enterprise data at a massive scale, any agent that reads or writes to production data without isolation or a reproducible trail is a liability, no matter how good the model is,” she said.

“…any agent that reads or writes to production data without isolation or a reproducible trail is a liability…”

Gartner expects 40 percent of enterprise applications to have task-specific agents embedded by the end of 2026, up from less than 5 percent a year earlier. IDC projects that agent use at the largest enterprises will grow tenfold by 2027, with the API and data calls those agents make growing a thousandfold.
That’s the scale production data has to withstand, and it’s what lakeFS is built to govern.

Agents sent to play in an isolated data sandbox 

To address these issues, lakeFS for Agentic AI gives every agent its own isolated data sandbox with a “zero-copy” branch of relevant data, so the agent can access the dataset it needs via references, snapshots, or copy-on-write techniques.

This means any changes the agent wishes to make must be validated and merged in accordance with the policy guidelines defined by the system architecture. In turn, this produces a unified audit trail across every agent action.

When running, lakeFS for Agentic AI is powered by its data version control architecture, which provides zero-copy data sandboxing. This enables isolation so that agent mistakes are automatically isolated and never corrupt production data. Every agent run is tied to an exact, immutable version of the data. Past actions can be recreated, debugged, audited, or extended using the same inputs.

Production data is gated by policy. Merges into production happen only after pre-merge validations pass. Every change can carry an agent identity, a run ID, and an execution context. The result is a unified audit trail instead of evidence scattered across orchestrators, model providers, and cloud logs.

Agents confined by branch-scoped credentials

Where agents are permitted to read and write through standard file operations. lakeFS provides file-level data access with branch-scoped credentials. These can be described as strictly cryptographically bounded, ephemeral access tokens that confine an agent to a specific branch of data or code, so that the agent operates only within its own workspace. This whole mechanism keeps each agent’s working set narrow and avoids context bloat. 

“With lakeFS Mount, a branch, or even a subset of a branch, can be mounted as a local directory inside the sandbox or virtual machine where the agent is running,” Orr confirms. “From the agent’s perspective, it’s just reading and writing to files and folders.” She further clarifies and notes that no LLM tokens are spent learning the lakeFS API. The agent works with a familiar filesystem interface, and lakeFS handles the versioning underneath.

Developers also have a couple of options for injecting custom validation logic. CEO Orr explains that software engineers can use webhooks or Lua scripts, both of which allow users to define behavior and rules that must be met before a merge can proceed. 

“Beyond automated checks, lakeFS also supports pull requests, which bring a human into the loop. In agentic workflows, this gives you a way to review and approve what an agent is proposing before it reaches production,” she clarifies.

Who else builds “Git for data” services?

Clearly, other vendors and projects exist in the data versioning market.

Apache Iceberg has functions for branching and tagging data. HPE acquired Pachyderm back in 2023 for its data versioning and pipelines technologies, which serve MLOps teams.

Originally developed by Dremio, Project Nessie is now an open-source data catalog and version control system for data lakes. Data Version Control (DVC) is an open-source data version control infrastructure designed for complex AI operations and big data environments, but now we’ve come full circle as lakeFS acquired the project in late 2025.

In the search for governance automation for agentic AI workloads, lakeFS appears to offer a comprehensive, cohesive set of tools and functions. In the “Git for data” marketplace, a variety of options exist, but lakeFS hasn’t explicitly positioned itself as a carte blanche replacement for similar or related tools.

One thing is certain: The questions of who is feeding what data to which agentic function, when, where, and why are becoming an increasingly pressing issue if we want AI to work correctly.

YOUTUBE.COM/THENEWSTACK

Tech moves fast, don't miss an episode. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to stream all our podcasts, interviews, demos, and more.

Created with Sketch.