Skip to content
CV Rocket
Get started
How it worksThe enginePricingBlogContactSign in

Open nowPosted 16 hours agoWe saw it 20 min after it went up

Thesis: Least-Privilege Tool Use for Coding Agents

Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB159 open roles

Where
Sundsvall, Sweden
Work mode
On site
Get the CV for this job

From $25 per CV, paid once. No subscription.

Your applicationOpen nowThesis: Least-Privilege Tool Use for Coding AgentsKnightec Group Compliance and Management AB · Sundsvall, Sweden

  1. YouYes, apply to this one.

  2. CV RocketCV written for this posting.

  3. 25 readersRecruiter, hiring manager, skeptic. Round after round.

  4. CV RocketApplied on Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB's own form.

The reply lands in your private mailbox

3×more interviews than doing it yourself with ChatGPT.

The clock on this job

Early applications get read.

9.8% of postings close within 7 days. Measured by our own scanner across the market. Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB postings stay open a median of 5 days.

Share of postings closed within
  1. 1.9%1 day
  2. 3.9%3 days
  3. 9.8%7 days
  4. 15.6%14 days
  5. 33.9%30 days
This job: posted 16 hours ago

Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB median: 5 days open

The posting

High Level Description Coding agents can read a repository, call package registries, and edit CI configuration. Those capabilities make them useful, and they also make a loose default risky: an agent can change the workflow that checks it or pull code from a source the project never intended. This thesis tests least-privilege setups for that tool use, and measures how often a tight policy blocks ordinary work versus risky calls.

Project Description The project will involve... The research will focus on....

Who are we looking for?

  • Bachelor’s/master’s student Computer Engineering with an interest in software security, developer tooling, and CI/CD.
  • Graduation in June 2027
  • Fluency in Swedish, both written and spoken
  • Fluency in English, both written and spoken

Purpose This thesis investigates how least-privilege controls can be applied to the tools a coding agent is allowed to use, and whether those controls can be tight enough to matter without stopping ordinary development work.

The aim is to move past a single “allow the tools” default by:

  • Identifying which capabilities common coding-agent tasks need, and which can stay off by default
  • Separating high-impact actions, such as repository write, package installation, and CI-configuration changes, so one task does not imply the others
  • Comparing broader and tighter policies on the same work, including cases where a human checkpoint is more appropriate than a silent allow or a hard denial
  • Measuring both sides of the trade-off: legitimate work that is blocked or delayed, and pre-agreed risky action classes that a policy allows, denies, or escalates
  • Presenting allows and denials in a form a developer can act on, for example in a CI log or a pull-request comment

A proof-of-concept policy layer should be implemented in a small lab and evaluated against a broad baseline. The choice of agent runtime, CI host, language ecosystems, policy mechanisms, and task set is part of the work, and should be agreed with the supervisor. Finding new ways to bypass the sandbox is out of scope.

In this thesis, investigate these questions:

  • Necessary permissions. Which tools do common coding-agent tasks actually use, and which can stay off by default?
  • Separation of capabilities. How should repository write, package installation, and CI edits be split so one task does not imply the others?
  • Blocked work. How often does a tighter policy stop a legitimate task, and is the block a hard denial or an approval step?
  • Risky-call coverage. How often do the same policies deny pre-agreed risky classes, such as secret access, CI permission changes, and fetches outside allowed sources?
  • Developer cost. How much extra friction — prompts, approvals, and time — does a tight policy add compared with a broad baseline?

Workflow fit. Can allows and denials be shown in a way a developer will use?

Scope and Limitations

Scope:

  • Investigating least-privilege policies for coding-agent tool use, rather than agent capability in general.
  • Implementing a proof-of-concept policy layer in a small, controlled lab.
  • Comparing policies on ordinary maintenance tasks and on a fixed scoring set of risky action classes, agreed in advance.
  • Evaluating the result as a method and a prototype, not as a production product.

Limitations:

  • The study does not aim to produce a production-ready control plane.
  • Results are tied to the agent, forge, and ecosystems chosen for the lab, and may not generalize.
  • The scoring set measures the policies under study. It is not a claim that a policy is safe in general.
  • Model poisoning, new sandbox bypasses, and compromised build infrastructure are out of scope.
  • No production credentials are used in the agent environment. An Exciting Journey with Knightec Group Semcon and Knightec have joined forces as Knightec Group. Together, we are Northern Europe’s leading strategic partner in product and digital service development. With a unique combination of cross-functional expertise and a holistic business understanding, we help our clients realize their strategies – from idea to complete solution.

Practical Information This is a thesis position, located at our office in Sundsvall. Start date January or March 2027.

Please submit your application as soon as possible, but no later than 2026-11-30. If you have any questions, you are welcome to contact [email protected]. Note that due to GDPR, we only accept applications through our careers page.

From $25, paid onceGet the CV for this job

What happens when you press

One press. We do the rest.

  1. A CV for this posting

    Written against Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB's own wording, from every piece of relevant proof in your profile.

  2. 25 readers review it

    Recruiter, hiring manager, skeptic and more read every draft, round after round. You get the best round.

    The review screen in CV Rocket: how each CV was read, round by round.

  3. We apply on Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB's form

    Our application engine gets through the hardest forms there are. Where a question needs you, AI suggests the best answer. Don't want us applying from our IP addresses? Use our Chrome extension: we apply straight from your own browser.

    An application in CV Rocket: every answer filled in on the employer's form.

  4. Every reply, sorted

    Knightec Group Compliance and Management AB's answer lands in your private mailbox, and we classify it on arrival: interview, question, rejection.

    The CV Rocket inbox: each employer reply classified as an interview, an action or a rejection.

  5. Reply with AI

    AI helps you write the email, checks it and sends it. We show you whether the recruiter read it.

  6. The interview in your calendar

    Full integration with your calendar. The invitation goes straight in.

    An interview invitation in the CV Rocket inbox, added to the candidate's calendar.
Get the CV for this job

From $25 per CV, paid once. No subscription.

Why it works

3×

more interviews than doing it yourself with ChatGPT.

ChatGPT writes a CV and never learns what happened to it. We see every reply. For each CV we know:

  • How it was written, and how the review scored it
  • When we applied, and how long after the posting went up
  • Which posting, which company, which city
  • Who got the interview, and who heard nothing

That is how we know which CVs get called.

Get the CV for this job

From $25 per CV, paid once. No subscription.

The numbers game

More applications. More interviews.

Every application goes out with its own CV, written for that posting and paid once. Send enough of them and the law of large numbers finds you the job.

Get the CV for this job
By hand5–10
With CV Rocket100
applications a day

Nearby

Live postings like this one

Same employer first, then the same role elsewhere.

Before you press

Straight answers

Get the CV for this job

From $25 per CV, paid once. No subscription.

What if my background isn't good enough?

We make the most of the background you have. The CV uses every piece of relevant proof your profile holds, and one of the 25 readers reads your whole profile and flags what the CV left out.

Do you really apply for me?

Yes, on the employer's own form, the hardest ones included. Where a question needs you, you answer it right there and AI suggests the best answer. Don't want us applying from our IP addresses? Use our Chrome extension: we apply straight from your own browser.

Is it a subscription?

No. You pay once per CV, from $25. Every application goes out with its own CV, written for that posting.

One job. One CV.
Paid once.

Pick the posting you want. We write for it, apply for you and catch the reply.

Get the CV for this job

From $25 per CV, paid once. No subscription.