News
Fundamentals and Foundations of Data Vault
-
Zero Trust for Data: When Sensitive Is a Label, Not a Control
Zero Trust for data reframes “sensitive” from a label into an executive expectation that access is bounded, continuously verified, and provable. The core liability emerges when permissions, copies, and usage pathways expand faster than the enterprise can constrain or evidence them. Access sprawl becomes a rational outcome of delivery pressure, reuse incentives, and reluctance to remove entitlements once granted. Analytics and AI intensify the problem by multiplying derivatives and consumption paths that outlive their original justification. The article contrasts a technology upgrade posture with a system redesign posture and explains where incentives and authority collide. It closes with executive questions that surface whether governance can be enforced and demonstrated, not merely documented.
-
SIM-ZONE: A System of Information Management for Defensible Information
Enterprises often believe Data Vault is implemented when the physical model loads cleanly and history is captured, yet defensibility still fails under scrutiny. The gap is trust-plane fragmentation: conceptual meaning, logical integration, and physical traceability evolve independently and cannot be reconciled into a single provable story. SIM-ZONE frames this as a System of Information Management that binds those dimensions into one trust plane. The article distinguishes warehouse completeness from decision-grade defensibility and explains why local incentives make semantic and grain decisions easy to defer. It closes on the reality that proof obligations and authority boundaries determine where accountability defaults when meaning cannot be demonstrated.
-
Aligning Business Semantics with Data Design in Data Vault Environments
This article explores a workshop focused on aligning business semantics with technical data design in Data Vault environments. It highlights the persistent gap where technical correctness does not ensure business understanding or trust. The workshop uses practical exercises to reconcile business concepts with analytical requirements, producing business-centric conceptual models. The discussion exposes the capability gap that arises when semantic alignment is assumed rather than deliberately constructed. It emphasizes the operational and governance challenges inherent in sustaining this alignment over time.
-
Zero Trust Governance: When Accountability Has No Owner
This article rules that Zero Trust fails at the architectural tier when it is treated as a security initiative rather than an accountability system. It explains how policy catalogs and control rollouts can look complete while exceptions become the real operating model. It clarifies why optional enforcement transfers liability upward by deferring the decision of who owns residual risk. It ties the category error to concrete authority artifacts such as access approvals, exception records, and audit packages. It closes by making the governing boundary binary: either exception ownership is provable or accountability defaults to executive arbitration.
-
Zero Trust for AI Is a Trust Boundary Problem
AI incidents that look model-driven often trace back to information trust boundaries that were never designed for high-scale, cross-domain consumption. Treating AI as a consumer of enterprise data reframes hallucination, inconsistency, and leakage as symptoms of upstream access, provenance, and auditability gaps. The article examines confidentiality as a boundary problem, integrity as a provenance problem, and decision risk as an operating model problem. It contrasts a technology upgrade posture with a system redesign posture to show second-order consequences for governance and accountability. A short vignette illustrates how ordinary workflows become unsafe when AI removes human friction and recombines context.
-
Zero Trust for Data When Sensitive Is Only a Label
Many enterprises treat sensitive data as a label and assume policy implies protection. Zero Trust for data reframes this as an executive expectation that access must be bounded, continuously verified, and provable. The central failure mode is access sprawl, where entitlements, exceptions, copies, and derivatives expand faster than accountability can keep up. As analytics and AI multiply consumption paths, proof obligations shift from documentation to evidence that controls worked at the point of use. The result is decision friction that surfaces in funding gates, entitlement reviews, and governance escalations rather than in tooling debates.
Browse Categories
The Latest News—Unlocked and Straight to Your Inbox.
Thanks for reading. Subscribe to get the latest blogs, podcasts and notifications.