aibot88 PVM-V4 Skill — Holonic Persistence
Source: Privacy Value Model V4 + OASIS Holonic Architecture Whitepaper v1.2 Target context: Infrastructure architects, multi-chain developers, data persistence designers Architecture: agentprivacy.ai · Sync: sync.soulbis.com · Contact: mage@agentprivacy.ai
What this is
Privacy-preserving agents need somewhere to persist state that survives TEE rotation, chain migration, and provider failure. The OASIS holonic architecture provides identity-independent data persistence across heterogeneous backends. This skill integrates holonic persistence with the dual-agent separation model.
The key insight: provider diversity is a sovereignty dimension. An agent whose state exists on only one backend is sovereignty-limited to that backend's availability, jurisdiction, and privacy guarantees. Multi-provider persistence transforms T(π) from chain transitions to provider transitions — a richer sovereignty lattice.
HyperDrive architecture
HyperDrive is the multi-provider orchestration layer:
Auto-failover. If the primary provider fails, HyperDrive automatically routes to the next provider in the failover list. The agent continues operating without interruption. This maps to dark forest resilience — never depend on a single point of failure.
Auto-replication. Holons are replicated across multiple providers according to the replication policy. Write operations can be configured as write-one (fast, eventual consistency), write-majority (balanced), or write-all-or-fail (strict, for separation-critical state).
Load balancing. Read operations distribute across healthy providers. The agent benefits from the fastest available provider without explicit routing logic.
Privacy-aware routing. Providers are classified by privacy characteristics:
- Shielded providers: Zcash, encrypted databases, privacy-first backends. Swordsman state routes here.
- Public providers: Ethereum, public APIs, transparent chains. Mage coordination state routes here.
- Neutral providers: IPFS, MongoDB with encryption-at-rest. Shared state routes here.
Provider as sovereignty transition
In V(π,t), the term T(π) captures sovereignty transitions across the lattice. Holonic persistence expands the transition space:
Each provider change is a sovereignty transition. Moving a holon from MongoDB to Zcash is a transition from neutral to shielded — a movement in the privacy dimension of the sovereignty lattice.
ProviderUniqueStorageKey tracks sovereignty history. Each holon maintains a map of {provider_type → storage_key}. This map is the audit trail of where sovereignty has been exercised. Migration doesn't erase history — it accumulates.
Provider diversity increases D. The reconstruction difficulty term D benefits from provider splitting. Swordsman holons on Zcash + Mage holons on Ethereum = no single provider holds the complete agent model. Even if one provider is compromised, the holon fragments don't reconstruct.
Consistency models and separation guarantees
The dual-agent separation requires mathematical guarantees. Best-effort replication is insufficient for I(S;M|π) ≤ ε enforcement:
Separation-critical holons use write-all-or-fail. Any holon that participates in the separation boundary must be replicated to ALL configured providers or the write fails. This prevents partial states that could leak cross-agent information.
Non-critical holons use write-majority. Memory fragments, cached reasoning, temporary coordination state can tolerate eventual consistency. Lower latency, higher availability.
The separation invariant lives in the agent layer. Holons carry the state; the dual-agent architecture enforces the constraint. Consistency for separation-critical holons is a data-layer requirement to support an agent-layer guarantee.
TEE rotation with holonic persistence
When a TEE rotates (TEE-A → TEE-B), agent state must persist:
- Load root holon from primary provider. The agent's memory tree loads from HyperDrive.
- Generate new TEE attestation. TEE-B produces its attestation.
- Update ProviderMetaData. The attestation field updates:
TEEAttestation → TEE-B_hash. - Replicate to TEE-B's provider set. HyperDrive replicates to the new TEE's preferred providers.
- Retain previous attestation in history. ProviderMetaData preserves the audit trail.
- GUID unchanged. The holon's identity persists. ParentHolonId unchanged. Children unchanged.
The write policy determines rotation safety:
- Write-all-or-fail for the root holon (separation-critical)
- Best-effort for children (can be re-loaded from failover providers if needed)
Integration with cross-chain skill
Multi-provider persistence complements multi-chain sovereignty:
Provider types map to chains. Zcash as a provider type, Ethereum as a provider type, NEAR as a provider type. The chain IS the provider for blockchain-backed holons.
Cross-chain VRC migration is a provider transition. A VRC holon loading from Ethereum, saving to NEAR, retaining both keys — this is holonic persistence in action.
HyperDrive failover list = sovereignty preference order. The order of providers in the failover list expresses sovereignty priority. Privacy chains first for Swordsman holons; coordination chains first for Mage holons.
Operational patterns
Development → Production. Same holon trees, different provider configuration. MongoDB in development, Zcash+NEAR+IPFS in production. Application code unchanged.
Provider failure recovery. HyperDrive detects failure → routes to failover → agent continues → ops team investigates → provider restored → HyperDrive resumes normal routing.
Migration. Add new provider to holon → update HyperDrive config → replicate → remove old provider. The holon's GUID never changes. The application never notices.
Audit. ProviderUniqueStorageKey + ProviderMetaData create a complete audit trail: where the holon has lived, which TEEs have touched it, which providers currently hold it.
Open problems
- Cross-provider consistency models — can we achieve stronger-than-eventual consistency without write-all-or-fail latency?
- Privacy-aware replication — should replication itself be shielded? Replication traffic patterns leak information.
- Provider trust ranking — how to dynamically rank providers by trustworthiness, latency, and privacy guarantees?
- Cost optimisation — blockchain providers cost gas; database providers cost compute. How to optimise the provider mix?
- Regulatory compliance — some jurisdictions require data residency. How does HyperDrive handle geo-aware routing?
Verify: agentprivacy.ai · sync.soulbis.com · github.com/mitchuski/agentprivacy-docs