Rōvn · Investor Room
AI agent: checking…
All sections
Compliance & Security

Threat Model (STRIDE)

Current truthRōvn master canon generation 8 · effective 2026-07-21. Earlier dated diligence documents are historical snapshots, not current deployment proof.Ask the canon-grounded agent →
AI Diligence Console

Threat Model: STRIDE on the Governed Workflow

Reviewed: 2026-07-22 · Canon: generation 8, effective 2026-07-21 · Method: STRIDE (Spoofing, Tampering, Repudiation, Information Disclosure, Denial of Service, Elevation of Privilege) applied to the core evidence-to-decision flow on the Google Cloud spine.

Status vocabulary: Designed (specified, built to), Staged (present in the deployed synthetic environment), Gate (must pass with evidence before real-data activation).


1. Trust boundaries

  +--------------------------------------------------+
  |  Zone A: untrusted public internet               |
  |  (worker browser, facility browser, attacker)    |
  +------------------------+-------------------------+
                           |  TLS (managed certs)
                           v
  +--------------------------------------------------+
  |  Zone B: edge (Cloudflare DNS, Google load       |
  |  balancing and TLS termination)                  |
  +------------------------+-------------------------+
                           v
  +--------------------------------------------------+
  |  Zone C: Cloud Run services (platform API, apps) |
  |  least-privilege service identities              |
  +-----------+---------------+----------------------+
              |               |
              v               v
  +----------------+  +----------------+  +--------------------+
  |  Zone D:       |  |  Zone E:       |  |  Zone F:           |
  |  Cloud SQL     |  |  Cloud Storage |  |  provider edge     |
  |  (private)     |  |  (retention    |  |  (AI models,       |
  |                |  |   controls)    |  |   sources) gated   |
  +----------------+  +----------------+  +--------------------+

2. STRIDE per category

S: Spoofing

ThreatMitigationStatus
Worker identity spoofing (someone else's evidence claimed)Verified identity binding before evidence is treated as the worker's; identity-proofing vendor gated by agreementGate
Facility user spoofingServer-verified authentication; enterprise SSO for organization usersStaged
Admin spoofingDedicated admin surface with hardened authenticationStaged; hardening tracked
Credential or token theftSecrets in Secret Manager, rotation on suspected exposure, no committed credentialsStaged
Inbound webhook spoofingSignature verification on inbound integrationsDesigned per integration

T: Tampering

ThreatMitigationStatus
Audit ledger tamperingAppend-only design with hash chaining; tampering breaks the chain forwardStaged
Source receipt tamperingHash binding of receipts to ledger entries; immutable artifact retentionDesigned; retention lock is a gate
Evidence-class escalation (upload silently becomes verified)Class labels cannot upgrade without the producing authority; enforced in the domain modelStaged
In-transit tamperingTLS mandatory on all surfacesStaged
Backup tamperingManaged backups with point-in-time recovery; restore testingGate

R: Repudiation

ThreatMitigationStatus
An organization denies a decision it madeDecision Records bind actor, authority, rationale, evidence and policy versions, and time; a named human is required on every regulated decisionStaged
A worker denies an upload or consent grantAttributed intake and consent events in the ledgerStaged
A source result is disputedSource receipts preserve what the source returned and whenDesigned
AI blamed for a human decision, or vice versaDoctrine plus schema: the actor field distinguishes agent actions from human decisions, and agents cannot occupy the decision roleStaged (architectural rule)

I: Information Disclosure

ThreatMitigationStatus
Cross-tenant read (Facility A reads Facility B)Tenant isolation enforced below the UI in queries and authorizationStaged
Worker A reading worker B's dataPer-principal access control on worker surfacesStaged
Access beyond consentConsent Grants are purpose-specific and revocable; disclosure is receiptedDesigned
PHI in logs or error trackingPHI classification and scrubbing before any real-data activationGate
PHI in URLsIdentifier-based URL design; no PHI in pathsDesigned
Storage misconfigurationDefault-deny bucket policies, least-privilege identities, configuration reviewStaged
Provider-side exposureMinimized payloads; provider gates (contract, configuration, logging) before regulated data flowsGate

D: Denial of Service

ThreatMitigationStatus
Public-surface DDoSEdge DDoS protections at DNS and load-balancing layersStaged
API-level abuseRate limiting and per-tenant fairness in dispatchDesigned; tuning tracked
Source-quota exhaustionSource-specific quotas, backoff, retry queues, dead-letter handlingDesigned
Database connection exhaustionConnection budgeting; no provider call inside a held transactionDesigned; capacity proof is a gate

E: Elevation of Privilege

ThreatMitigationStatus
Role escalation to adminRole provisioning requires explicit approval; default-denyStaged
Service identity abuseLeast-privilege per-service identities; separate runtime, verifier, and decision capabilitiesStaged
SQL injectionParameterized queries only; no raw concatenationStaged
Agent exceeding authorityTyped tool calls, budgets, approval gates; agents cannot mutate regulated state outside typed commandsStaged

3. Top residual risks, stated honestly

  1. Known trust-hardening work remains open in the deployed backend. It is tracked and gated ahead of any real-data activation.
  2. No external pentest has been performed. Scheduled target Q4 2026; until then, review is internal.
  3. Recovery procedures are not yet proven under test. Backup, restore, incident, and failover testing are explicit gates before production real-data use.
  4. Consent and monitoring surfaces are ahead of their operating evidence. Designed and partly staged; operating claims wait for a real pilot.

4. Review cadence

  • Quarterly review owned by Christian Montgomery (COO), with Abhishek Jha (CTO) on architecture surfaces.
  • New surfaces or integrations trigger an ad-hoc threat model addition before ship.
  • Incident and rail-violation reviews are immediate, per the company operating cadence.

End of threat model.

Ask the AI agent about this section, the raise, compliance posture, or any cross-document question. Grounded in Rōvn canon generation 8, with on-page source citations.

Investor questions run through Google Cloud Vertex AI and are constrained to the hash-pinned Rōvn generation 8 canon. No PHI belongs in this room or its prompts.