Dylan Davis

Reimagining Compliance, Trust and TPRM: Could Blockchain End Our Reliance on PDFs, Screenshots and Questionnaires? ⛓️ Why not use proof instead of trust. And what if instead of trusting auditors, we also trust math? 🔢 Who trusts Attestations and Certifications? 📋 SOC 2 provides trust. You also require trust. You trust that: - The vendor implemented what they claimed (lol, sure) - The auditor properly validated those claims (with screenshots, of course) - Controls haven't degraded since assessment (infrastructure never changes) - Documentation reflects reality (boilerplate policies FTW) But in security, trust isn't a strategy - verification is. Blockchain Security Validation: Trust the Proof ⛓️ Imagine replacing subjective assessment with cryptographic verification: - Configuration states are validated and cryptographically signed - Results immutably recorded on blockchain, evidence are now tamper-proofed - Smart contracts can validate controls automatically against predefined criteria - You can check historical record showing continuous compliance, - Easy real-time alerting when controls drift from attested state Rather than an auditor telling you that "encryption is used," the system would cryptographically verify that "TLS 1.3 is correctly implemented on all endpoints with no deprecated ciphers." Documentation Theatre to Verifiable Security 🎭 This transforms security attestation from paperwork exercise to mathematical proof: - Customers verify cryptographic evidence instead of reading through lengthy massaged control language - Vendors can prove continuous compliance, not just during audit cycles - Configuration drift triggers immediate alerts, not annual findings - Technical teams focus on implementation, not documentation - Customers can check control effectiveness without seeing sensitive implementation details, preserving vendor confidentiality The blockchain creates a permanent, verifiable history addressing both trust issues and point-in-time limitations of current attestations. Why This Matters 🎯 By bridging the documentation-reality gap with cryptographic proof, we eliminate the need for sample-based shallow testing. Imagine never having to answer "Do you have MFA?" again because customers can verify your MFA implementation themselves. The Path Forward 🚀 This isn't woo-woo - the building blocks exist today. We have: - Secure enclave technologies for sensitive validation - Smart contract platforms for attestation logic - API-driven cloud environments ready for integration - Zero-knowledge proofs for private verification What's missing is standardisation and ecosystem adoption. The first vendor to implement this model won't just streamline compliance/audit - they'll fundamentally change TPRM/customer trust dynamics. PS: This wouldn't work for all controls, lots of legal liability to work through, etc. #GRCEngineering

47

29 Comments

Smart cyber founders are doing something different. If you're a startup and this is you: “We’re a CNAPP platform.” “We’re an XDR solution.” “We’re a next-gen SIEM.” You're not selling your product, you're selling your category. And congratulations!! You're now in a race with 99 other vendors who all look, sound, and promise the same things. Most of these labels were invented by analysts (cough gartner). They sound tidy, they’re good for reports, but they show 0 value. Here is what the new wave is doing. They talk about the pain, they offer the outcome, and they lead with a deep understanding of their customers. “We help SaaS startups pass security reviews in 3 days.” “We stop shadow access in AWS before a breach.” “We reduce SOC burnout by 40% in under 6 weeks.” This is outcome-driven and has a much bigger impact. It specifically targets a group of customers who have a problem. They think, “That’s what I need.” You don't need to sound innovative and special, you don't need another gartnerism. Just tell people the exact problem you solve. Have cyber acronyms gone too far?

30

7 Comments

Too many founders with compliance requirements still treat cybersecurity like a “big company problem.” You’ll hear things like: “We’re too small, people will understand.” “We don’t have the budget for that yet.” But if your business touches sensitive data—HIPAA, PCI, or anything else— you’re not just taking a risk. You’re violating an expectation. One that regulators, clients, and your future acquirer will not overlook. Cyber requirements aren't an IT line item. They are in fact a regulatory requirement. The cost of getting it wrong goes far beyond ransom payouts or downtime. You’re putting your team, your customers, and your valuation at risk. Boards need to push harder. Founders need to act sooner. Because if you’re waiting until something breaks— you’re not just behind. It is called willful neglect and it can result in much more than a slap on the wrist. #cybersecurity #founders #leadership #riskmanagement #compliance #startups #scaling

21

4 Comments