Protocol 3.6DevelopmentSENTINEL · AI-DEGRADED
Code Ownership
Checks for CODEOWNERS file defining who is responsible for which parts of the codebase.
CODEOWNERS ensures the right experts review changes to critical paths and prevents "nobody owns this" drift.
Velocity Governance · Sentinel-10 Protocol
Protocol 3.6 is one of the 10 engineering practices Concordance flags as most degraded under AI-accelerated development. That 3 publicly-documented incidents in this Index already failed it — before AI was the dominant velocity driver — is exactly the pattern the Velocity Governance thesis predicts will accelerate. Read the thesis →
Incidents that failed this protocol
OktaOct 2023enterprise
Okta support-portal HAR file leak exposes 134 customer environments
Code ownership / responsibility for the service account was not clearly assigned, allowing personal-device storage to persist.
xz utils (Tukaani Project)Mar 2024civilizational
CVE-2024-3094 — multi-year social-engineering attack inserts backdoor into xz/liblzma
Code ownership: a critical infrastructure library had a single maintainer with no co-ownership or succession structure.
OpenSSL ProjectApr 2014civilizational
CVE-2014-0160 — Heartbleed buffer over-read in OpenSSL TLS heartbeat
Code ownership: at the time, OpenSSL had ~2 active maintainers for code that secured most of the internet — a structural under-resourcing of critical infrastructure.
See where your repo scores against Protocol 3.6 — and the other 49 — in 60 seconds.
Run a free scan →Full framework →