Read Complete Article ## | https://www.aakashrahsi.online/post/rahsi-security
Most security programs don’t fail because they lack tools.
They fail because truth loses state under pressure.
In the CVE era, tooling expands faster than governance: connectors drift, permissions sprawl, automation moves fast, and AI compresses uncertainty into confident summaries.
The result isn’t always a breach — it’s worse:
A response you can’t defend.
So I built a control-plane pattern I call:
Rahsi Security State Sovereignty™
From Tools to Truth: The Five States You Must Control
This is not a dashboarding framework.
It’s a runtime accountability model built for real-world incident response across:
- Microsoft Sentinel
- Defender XDR
- Entra ID
- Microsoft Purview
- Microsoft 365 Copilot / Copilot for Security
The Core Premise
If you can’t control these five states in the moment,
you don’t control your incident.
1. Evidence State
⟶ Time-true telemetry, provenance, and replayability
2. Identity State
⟶ Risk score, session context, Conditional Access, OAuth consent, Graph scope
3. Data State
⟶ Purview labels, DLP outcomes, lifecycle + sensitivity boundaries
4. Action State
⟶ Narrow, reversible, audit-survivable levers with policy gating
5. Narrative State
⟶ Summaries that cannot outrun citations, session evidence, and scope enforcement
This is how you stay calm during ToolShell, EchoLeak, or CVE-surge windows:
Narrow first → Act second → Narrate last
❗ Warning Sign: The "Helpful" AI Trap
If your SOC is "AI-assisted"
but not:
- Identity-bound
- Policy-gated
- Evidence-cited
- Audit-survivable
Then it’s not an assistant.
It’s an unaudited operator.
The Real Leap Isn’t a New Tool
It’s this:
State Sovereignty — so every decision survives
the CISO, the auditor, and the post-incident review.
Let’s stop pretending more dashboards = more control.
Let’s build a world where AI, governance, and runtime security meet.
—
Designed & deployed inside real Microsoft tenants by @AakashRahsi
Top comments (0)