Install
$ agentstack add skill-peterbamuhigire-skills-web-dev-ai-agent-memory-erasure-proof ✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ● Network access Used
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
About
AI Agent Memory Erasure Proof
Acknowledgement: Shared by Peter Bamuhigire, techguypeter.com, +256 784 464178.
Use When
- A data subject (or controller on their behalf) submits an erasure request under GDPR Art. 17, CCPA / CPRA, POPIA s.24, KE DPA s.40 that includes agent-derived memory (working / episodic / semantic / vectors / fine-tune corpora).
- Proving end-to-end that the 9-step cascade ran to completion and that no residue remains in any tier, any replica, any backup index, any vector store, any subprocessor cache.
- Producing a signed proof-of-erasure artefact the data subject's controller (or regulator) can verify offline.
- Closing the loop between
ai-agent-memory(which performs the cascade) and the compliance evidence pipeline.
Do Not Use When
- Designing the memory tiers themselves —
ai-agent-memory. - Designing the tenant-level erasure orchestrator (whole tenant erasure) —
saas-tenant-data-portability-and-erasure. - Drafting the policy / DPIA — SRS engine.
- Erasing action audit log entries — those have a separate redaction flow (audit log is retained per regulatory minima with PII redaction, not deleted).
Required Inputs
- Erasure request envelope:
request_id,subject_id,tenant_id,data_classes ⊆ {working,episodic,semantic,vectors,fine_tune,uploads,derivatives},legal_basis(regulation citation),received_at,requester_identity_proof_ref. - Memory tier catalogue with storage locator for each tier (DB tables, object stores, vector indexes, LLM-provider knowledge-base IDs, fine-tune model IDs).
- Subprocessor inventory with erasure-API surface (which subprocessors hold subject data and how to delete from each).
- Hash-chained action audit log (so the cascade itself is recorded as
event_class=erasure_step).
Workflow
- Read this
SKILL.md. - Receive the request, validate identity, record
subject_id → erasure_request_idon the action audit log (§1). - Run the 9-step cascade (§2) — each step writes a step record, calls the underlying tier API, and emits a verification probe.
- After the cascade, run the verification job (§3) — probes every tier (and subprocessors) for residue using the deterministic subject fingerprint.
- Produce the proof-of-erasure pack (§4) — signed, hash-chained, includes step records + verification results.
- Notify the requester with the pack reference and the
verified_attimestamp; honour the regulatory clock (GDPR: 1 month, CCPA: 45 days, POPIA / KE DPA: "without undue delay"). - Retain the proof for the retention class (minimum 6 years; longer in HIPAA-adjacent contexts) — the request and the proof are evidence, the underlying data is gone.
- Apply anti-patterns (§5).
Quality Standards
- The 9 steps are idempotent — re-running the cascade is safe and emits identical results.
- Each step record carries before / after fingerprints so the auditor can verify the deletion observably reduced the search space.
- Verification probes are independent of the deletion path (different code, different storage handles).
- Subprocessor receipts are stored alongside the proof (LLM provider deletion ticket IDs, vector-store deletion confirmations).
- No silent failures — a step that cannot complete (e.g. fine-tune model still in use) opens a regulator-grade exception within SLO.
- The proof is portable — the requester / their controller / a regulator can verify the signature without our platform.
Anti-Patterns
- Soft-delete with a
deleted_atflag in the memory table. Not erasure; data still recoverable. - Vector store deletion via "remove from index" without confirming the underlying record was purged. ANN indexes often retain shards.
- Fine-tune corpora deleted from source but the fine-tuned model retained. The model itself contains the data; either retrain or document why retention is lawful (Art. 17(3) exception with documented justification).
- Subprocessor "we deleted it" e-mail. Need an API confirmation with a ticket ID stored in the proof.
- Erasing the action audit log entries about the subject. The audit log is retained with PII redacted; deleting it destroys evidence that the erasure happened.
- Single-tier erasure (e.g. only working memory) without checking the others. Episodic and semantic often contain reconstructions of the same subject.
- Pack signed by the engineer who ran the cascade. Segregation-of-duties failure; sign by a separate compliance owner.
Outputs
erasure_requeststable + step-by-steperasure_stepstable.- 9-step cascade orchestrator (Python).
- Independent verification job (Python).
- Signed proof-of-erasure pack format.
- Subprocessor receipt collator.
- Auditor portal endpoint.
Evidence Produced
| Category | Artifact | Format | Example | |----------|----------|--------|---------| | Compliance | Erasure request record | DB row + JSON snapshot | evidence/erasure/{request_id}/request.json | | Compliance | Step records (×9) | JSONL | .../steps.jsonl | | Compliance | Verification probe results | JSON | .../verification.json | | Compliance | Subprocessor receipts | JSONL | .../subprocessor-receipts.jsonl | | Compliance | Proof-of-erasure pack | tar.gz + signature | .../proof.tar.gz | | Compliance | Audit-log redaction record | JSON | .../audit-log-redaction.json |
References
references/erasure-verification-job.md— Full Python implementation of the cascade orchestrator + independent verification job + proof pack writer.- Companions:
ai-agent-memory(the cascade implementer),saas-tenant-data-portability-and-erasure(tenant-level),ai-agent-audit-log-integrity(redaction not deletion),ai-agent-evidence-automation(pack pipeline),ai-agent-hipaa-security-controls(PHI agent erasure constraints),uganda-dppa-compliance(KE / UG specifics),ai-agent-soc2-controls(C1.2, P5).
§1 Intake
# privacy/erasure/intake.py
from dataclasses import dataclass
from datetime import datetime, timedelta
REGULATORY_CLOCKS = {
"GDPR": timedelta(days=30),
"CCPA": timedelta(days=45),
"POPIA": timedelta(days=30), # "reasonable time" — internally bound to 30
"KE_DPA": timedelta(days=30),
}
@dataclass
class ErasureRequest:
request_id: str
tenant_id: str
subject_id: str
data_classes: list[str]
legal_basis: str
received_at: datetime
requester_identity_proof_ref: str
sla_deadline: datetime
def accept(request: dict) -> ErasureRequest:
req = ErasureRequest(
request_id=request["request_id"],
tenant_id=request["tenant_id"],
subject_id=request["subject_id"],
data_classes=request.get("data_classes", ["working","episodic","semantic","vectors","fine_tune","uploads","derivatives"]),
legal_basis=request["legal_basis"],
received_at=datetime.fromisoformat(request["received_at"]),
requester_identity_proof_ref=request["requester_identity_proof_ref"],
sla_deadline=datetime.fromisoformat(request["received_at"]) + REGULATORY_CLOCKS[request["legal_basis"]],
)
audit.emit(event_class="erasure_request_accepted",
subject_id=req.subject_id, request_id=req.request_id,
legal_basis=req.legal_basis, sla_deadline=req.sla_deadline.isoformat())
return req
§2 The 9-Step Cascade
| # | Step | Tier / Action | |---|---|---| | 1 | Working memory | Wipe in-flight session state for subject. | | 2 | Episodic memory | Delete subject-tagged rows in episodic store; verify replication lag drained. | | 3 | Semantic memory | Delete subject-attributed nodes; rebuild affected entity graph. | | 4 | Vector store | Delete vectors by subject metadata; rebuild affected ANN shards. | | 5 | Fine-tune corpora | Delete subject-attributed examples from training datasets; record affected model lineage. | | 6 | Uploads / artefacts | Delete object-store blobs (with replicas across regions). | | 7 | Derivatives | Delete embeddings, summaries, indexes derived from subject data. | | 8 | Subprocessors | Issue delete API calls to LLM provider knowledge bases, vector-store SaaS, fine-tune providers; collect receipts. | | 9 | Audit-log redaction | Redact (not delete) PII fields in action audit log entries; preserve hashes and chain. |
# privacy/erasure/cascade.py
from datetime import datetime
import hashlib, json
CASCADE = [
("working", wipe_working_memory),
("episodic", delete_episodic),
("semantic", delete_semantic),
("vectors", delete_vectors),
("fine_tune", purge_finetune_corpora),
("uploads", delete_uploads),
("derivatives", delete_derivatives),
("subprocessor", delete_at_subprocessors),
("audit_log", redact_audit_log),
]
def run_cascade(req: ErasureRequest) -> list[dict]:
fp_before = subject_fingerprint(req)
steps: list[dict] = []
for name, fn in CASCADE:
if name not in req.data_classes and name != "audit_log": # audit_log always redacted
continue
rec = {"step": name, "started_at": datetime.utcnow().isoformat()}
before = fp_before[name]
try:
out = fn(req)
after = probe_residue(req, tier=name)
rec.update({"status": "ok", "before_count": before, "after_count": after, "output": out})
except Exception as e:
rec.update({"status": "fail", "error": str(e)})
rec["ended_at"] = datetime.utcnow().isoformat()
steps.append(rec)
audit.emit(event_class="erasure_step",
subject_id=req.subject_id, request_id=req.request_id, step=name,
status=rec["status"], after_count=rec.get("after_count"))
return steps
subject_fingerprint(req) returns per-tier residue counts before the cascade, so the proof shows before / after.
Full per-step implementations and the residue probes are in references/erasure-verification-job.md.
§3 Independent Verification Job
The verification job is a separate code path that re-queries every tier (and subprocessors) using a freshly-resolved subject fingerprint and asserts residue is zero.
# privacy/erasure/verify.py
def verify(req: ErasureRequest) -> dict:
probes = {
"working": probe_working_memory(req),
"episodic": probe_episodic(req),
"semantic": probe_semantic(req),
"vectors": probe_vectors(req),
"fine_tune": probe_finetune(req),
"uploads": probe_uploads(req),
"derivatives": probe_derivatives(req),
"subprocessor": probe_subprocessors(req),
"audit_log_redacted": probe_audit_log_redaction(req),
}
all_clear = all(v["residue"] == 0 for k, v in probes.items() if k != "audit_log_redacted") and probes["audit_log_redacted"]["unredacted_pii_count"] == 0
return {"verified_at": datetime.utcnow().isoformat(), "all_clear": all_clear, "probes": probes}
If all_clear == False, the erasure is not complete; an exception opens and the requester is not notified yet.
§4 Proof-of-Erasure Pack
evidence/erasure/{request_id}/
├── manifest.json
├── request.json # the validated ErasureRequest
├── steps.jsonl # one row per cascade step
├── verification.json # the verification probe results
├── subprocessor-receipts.jsonl # API ticket IDs per subprocessor
├── audit-log-redaction.json # the redaction range + chain witness
├── attestation.txt # signed by DPO (not the cascade runner)
└── signature.sig
Sample manifest.json:
{
"pack_id": "erasure-req-001928",
"request_id": "req-001928",
"subject_id": "sub_5e3a... (hashed)",
"tenant_id": "ten_0440",
"legal_basis": "GDPR",
"received_at": "2026-04-20T09:11:00Z",
"completed_at": "2026-04-22T15:44:00Z",
"sla_deadline": "2026-05-20T09:11:00Z",
"all_clear": true,
"signer": "dpo@example.com",
"signature_key_id": "compliance-dpo-2026",
"files": [...]
}
§5 Anti-Patterns
- Soft-delete (
deleted_atflag) — not erasure under GDPR/CCPA/POPIA/KE DPA. - Vector "remove from index" without underlying record purge.
- Deleting fine-tune corpora but keeping the fine-tuned model. Either retrain or document a lawful retention basis (Art. 17(3)).
- "Deletion confirmed via email" from a subprocessor. Require API confirmation with ticket ID.
- Deleting audit log rows. Redact PII; keep the chain.
- Verification done by the same code path as the cascade. Independent probes are required.
- Pack signed by the engineer who ran the cascade. Sign by an independent DPO.
- Re-running the cascade is unsafe (non-idempotent). Each step must tolerate replay.
- Not capturing the subprocessor receipts. The auditor will ask for them; verbal assurance does not pass.
§6 Cross-Links
ai-agent-memory— implements the actual tier deletes; this skill consumes those.saas-tenant-data-portability-and-erasure— whole-tenant erasure orchestrator; references this skill for the agent-memory leg.ai-agent-audit-log-integrity— defines the PII redaction (not deletion) flow for the audit log; redaction record is part of the proof.ai-agent-soc2-controls— C1.2 (confidential information disposal), P5 (retention and disposal).ai-agent-hipaa-security-controls— additional constraints when subject is a patient (BAA / 164.310(d)(2)(i) media disposal).uganda-dppa-compliance— KE / UG specifics forlegal_basis ∈ {KE_DPA, UG_DPPA}.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: peterbamuhigire
- Source: peterbamuhigire/skills-web-dev
- License: MIT
- Homepage: https://techguypeter.com
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet — be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.