Pruebas continuas de escape para sandboxes de agentes

Un arnés de pruebas y un servicio de seguimiento de CVE que sondean de forma continua las librerías de sandbox (mxc, bubblewrap, gVisor) en busca de escapes y configuraciones incorrectas antes de que los proveedores de herramientas para agentes las publiquen.

I want to build a venture-scale product. Help me plan and start the MVP.

Product: Continuous escape testing for agent sandboxes
What it is: A test harness and CVE-watch service that continuously probes sandbox libraries (mxc, bubblewrap, gVisor) for escapes and misconfigurations before agent-tool vendors ship them.
Who pays: Security/engineering leads at AI coding-agent and agent-runtime companies (20–500 engineers), $2–10k/mo from the security-testing budget, alongside existing pentest spend.
Closest alternatives: Manual pentest firms (Trail of Bits, NCC Group), OSS-Fuzz / generic fuzzing, One-off audits and CVE feeds, In-house red teaming
The gap: Existing options are episodic human audits or generic fuzzers; nothing continuously regression-tests sandbox libraries and configurations for known escape classes (capability ordering, setuid mistakes, kernel-boundary assumptions) across versions and backends as they ship.
Why now: Every agent vendor is shipping or adopting a sandbox this year (Codex already uses mxc per c:50020557), and commenters demonstrate these codebases already contain exploitable escapes, creating urgent demand for independent validation.
Moat to build toward: A growing corpus of escape test cases and per-backend configuration fingerprints that improves with each disclosed CVE and audit, plus integration into CI making switching costly.

Un brief listo para pegar en Claude Code, Cursor o cualquier agente de programación (en inglés).