Legal judgment
Privilege, eDiscovery, investigations, records, contract risk, chain of custody and defensibility.
Richard E. Davis · JD · CISA · CRISC · AAISM · CISSP · ITIL
Technology risk made concrete enough to govern.
I work where law, cybersecurity, AI, operations and evidence meet. The objective is practical: understand the system that actually exists, define who may act, instrument the decisions that matter and preserve evidence strong enough for a board, regulator, customer or incident team to rely on.
A career built across boundaries
Operational security
Incident response, cyber fusion, threat intelligence, digital forensics, insider risk and supplier security.
Bounded autonomy
AI lifecycle governance, agentic authority, harness architecture, observability and continuous assurance.
Evidence that travels
Board reporting, regulatory mapping, control testing and technical narratives that remain defensible under scrutiny.
Practical Trust
Control claims should survive contact with operations.
A framework is useful only when leaders can establish what happened, interrupt what should not happen and recover when something goes wrong. That means connecting policy to technical enforcement, accountable ownership and independently protected evidence.
The work on this site reflects that operating perspective. It is educational material and a set of working models—not a certification, legal opinion or substitute for context-specific advice.