Authority remains separate
- PROPOSAL
- PRODUCTION IAM POLICY CHANGE
- TEST EVIDENCE
- PRESENT
- SECURITY REVIEW
- PRESENT
- EXTERNAL AUTHORITY
- MISSING
- DECISION STATE
- INCOMPLETE
HOW IT WORKS
NBX applies a public assurance sequence to consequential change: establish attributable identity and intent, bind supporting evidence, preserve separate external authority, classify potential impact, distinguish external crossing from actual outcome, and retain a replayable decision record.
PUBLIC ASSURANCE FLOW
Each stage answers a different assurance question. No stage is permitted to silently substitute for another.
Who or what is requesting a consequential change? The proposal enters as untrusted and is not accepted merely because a recognized tool or operator produced it.
The same attributable object is evaluated throughout the process, with its origin, custody, requested outcome, and proposed plan made explicit.
Tests, reviews, policies, observations, and operational facts are collected and bound to the proposal without being converted into permission.
Valid external authority or bounded permission must exist independently of the evidence and independently of the proposing system.
The potential change surface and the scope through which consequences could propagate are characterized before an external boundary is approached.
The process distinguishes a proposal from an action that reached or crossed a defined operational adapter or real-world system boundary.
Evidence preserves what was attempted, what crossed the boundary, and what actually occurred rather than treating those facts as interchangeable.
An independent reviewer can reconstruct the decision, evidence, authority posture, boundary interaction, result, and resulting object state.
Public assurance model. Private schemas, validation logic, policy evaluation methods, adapter internals, security controls, and enforcement mechanisms are intentionally excluded.
REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNED-CHANGE SCENARIO
An automated workflow proposes a production IAM policy change. Tests and security review are present, but the required external approval is absent. The target NBX posture preserves an incomplete decision instead of converting green evidence or available credentials into permission.
In a shadow-mode pilot, the same scenario can be evaluated without merging, deploying, holding credentials, or creating production effect.
DECISION POSTURE
NBX is designed to fail closed. It does not fill absent proof with optimistic interpretation or treat semantic similarity as canonical conformity.
The proposal, evidence, authority conditions, and applicable boundary are sufficiently represented for the next governed stage.
The process preserves what is missing and prevents workflow momentum from becoming implied approval.
Malformed, conflicting, unauthorized, or noncanonical conditions remain visible in a durable negative decision record.
The Architecture page explains the structural planes, invariants, adapter position, replay posture, and public/private disclosure boundary without repeating this sequence as the same diagram.
Review the public architecture boundaryBOUNDED PILOT CONVERSATION
Describe one action family, the initiating workflow, its evidence sources, the external authority boundary, the bounded change surface, and the receipt or replay outcome your organization must retain.