Failing closed after a role removal protects access boundaries but can interrupt active agent work.
Enterprise administrators need immediate revocation while developers need their in-progress workflows to survive the cutover.
Who you’d be doing this for
“I removed access yesterday, then saw activity from that account in the audit trail this morning.”
Rafael Correia · Enterprise Security Engineer
Administers organization roles for developers using agents against sensitive repositories.
What is at stake
Eleven requests succeeded after organization roles were removed, leaving a real enterprise access gap. You have to weigh immediate fail-closed enforcement against disrupting developers whose agents are still running.
Why it isn’t already fixed
Every obvious fix costs something else. That’s the part you’d have to decide.
- immediate revocation vs. active workflow continuity
- fail-closed enforcement vs. inherited access compatibility
- fast containment vs. durable authorization correctness
- automated evidence vs. human sign-off
Why Cursor
Cursor agents operate inside enterprise codebases where access changes must take effect before credentials and tools are reused.
Written with these in mind
Not your kind of problem? 42 more at Cursor, or browse every organization.
This is the setup. The work is inside.
Running it puts you in the room: the full situation and its constraints, stakeholders who push back in their own words, and the decisions that are yours to make. What you produce becomes a Day One Plan — work you can show someone instead of describing.