Define acceptable use
Associate protected data with rules covering authorised purpose, identity, device, environment, time or other approved conditions.
Post-breach data control
Keep control after data moves.
PastWipe addresses the stage conventional cybersecurity cannot guarantee: what happens after protected data is copied, exposed or exfiltrated. It combines policy-aware control, cryptographic validation, identity and device context, and evidence records to reduce the usable value of data outside approved conditions.
PastWipe complements existing identity, endpoint, network, DLP, monitoring and incident-response systems. It does not replace them.
Post-Exfiltration Focus
Policy-Aware Control
Evidence and Attestation
RepSec Optional
Re-check at the point of use
Evaluate whether current conditions still satisfy the policy before protected content is released, rendered or accepted.
Record the control decision
Support review, audit and incident analysis with evidence showing what was requested, evaluated, permitted, denied or degraded.
The security gap
Prevention matters. It is not the final control point.
Firewalls, EDR, IAM, DLP, SIEM and incident response are essential. But once a usable copy leaves the protected environment, the organisation can lose practical control over how long it remains useful, where it is used and who can rely on it. PastWipe is designed for that unresolved stage.
PastWipe sits after prevention—not instead of it.
The objective is not to promise that every breach can be stopped. It is to reduce the consequences when prevention, detection or human behaviour fails.
- Keep the existing security stack in place.
- Add control to selected high-value data and workflows.
- Re-evaluate use after copying, movement or loss of trust.
- Generate evidence for technical, legal, compliance and insurance review.
Stage 1
Prevent
Identity, endpoint, network, DLP and access controls
Essential
Stage 2
Detect
Monitoring, telemetry, analytics, SIEM and SOC
Essential
Stage 3
Respond
Containment, investigation, recovery and notification
Essential
Stage 4
Control after movement
Policy validation, restricted use, degradation and evidence
PastWipe
Operating model
How the control cycle works
The implementation can vary by sector and system. The core principle remains consistent: protected data should not be treated as permanently trusted merely because access was valid at the moment it was first obtained.
Protect selected data
Apply PastWipe to information and workflows where post-breach misuse would create material financial, operational, legal or public harm.
Attach policy
Define the conditions under which the data may be opened, validated, rendered, transferred or relied upon.
Evaluate context
Use available identity, device, environment, time, purpose and attestation signals to test whether the use remains legitimate.
Enforce and evidence
Permit, deny, restrict or degrade the result, then create evidence suitable for operational review and investigation.
PastWipe and RepSec
Product layer and protocol direction—clearly separated.
PastWipe is the deployable post-breach control approach. RepSec is the optional protocol framework intended to help different systems express policy, validation, evidence and non-reusability in a more interoperable way. PastWipe does not depend on universal RepSec adoption.
Designed to work within existing environments
PastWipe can be integrated into selected applications, data flows and enterprise controls without waiting for a new internet-wide standard.
- Policy engine and control decisions
- Identity, device and context validation
- Cryptographic verification where applicable
- Evidence, logging and review support
Designed for broader interoperability and future assurance
RepSec describes a direction for consistent policy, validation and evidence exchange across participating systems. RepSec-Q extends that direction toward post-quantum resilience.
- Optional—not required for PastWipe deployment
- Not presented as a universally adopted standard
- Requires technical validation and ecosystem participation
- Post-quantum claims depend on the selected cryptography and implementation
Clear limitations
What PastWipe cannot do
Credible security requires clear boundaries. PastWipe reduces risk in supported, policy-aware workflows; it does not claim to remove every form of copying, disclosure or misuse.
It cannot guarantee that data will never be stolen
PastWipe is not a substitute for access control, endpoint protection, network security, DLP, monitoring, backup or incident response.
It cannot stop photographs, screenshots or manual retyping in every case
An authorised viewer may still photograph a screen, retype content or create another physical representation. No software can eliminate that risk completely.
It cannot reliably revoke uncontrolled copies that have already become independent plaintext
The strongest control applies before or during authorised use. Once data is exported into an unsupported, unrestricted format, enforcement may be reduced or lost.
It cannot offer identical enforcement across every legacy, offline or third-party workflow
Results depend on integration depth, supported applications, connectivity, device trust, identity signals and how much control the organisation retains over the workflow.
The practical objective: materially reduce the value, reliability and legitimate usability of protected data after trust is lost—without pretending that software can defeat every human or physical copying method.
Priority environments
For data whose continued misuse creates serious consequences
PastWipe is most relevant where the value of copied data remains high long after the breach itself: regulated information, financial records, citizen data, intellectual property, operational documentation and sensitive evidence.
Corporate and high-value operational data
Apply policy-aware controls to selected internal, customer, contractual or intellectual-property workflows where persistent misuse would be material.
Banking and financial services
Support stronger control around sensitive records, regulated processes, evidentiary confidence and post-breach exposure.
Government and public sector
Address citizen data, sovereignty-sensitive information and higher-assurance workflows where unauthorised reuse may create lasting public harm.
Security, insurance and response stakeholders
Provide clearer technical evidence and a more measurable post-breach control story for security leaders, incident responders, legal teams, underwriters and technology partners.
Technical evaluation
The right question is not “Does it stop every breach?”
The useful evaluation is whether PastWipe can reduce exposure for a defined data class, within a defined workflow, under measurable operating conditions.
Which data genuinely needs post-breach control?
Start with high-value information rather than attempting to protect every file in the same way.
- Data class and sensitivity
- Expected users and systems
- Consequences of unauthorised reuse
Which signals are available and trustworthy?
Assess identity, device, application, environment, time, connectivity and attestation requirements.
- Online and offline operation
- Legacy and third-party dependencies
- Failure and recovery behaviour
What result can be measured and defended?
Define success before deployment and test against real attack, misuse and operational scenarios.
- Allow, deny and degradation outcomes
- False-positive and availability impact
- Logs, receipts and review evidence
Understand the category before evaluating the product
Explore PastWipe's mission, technical perspective and analysis of post-breach data control, non-reusability and long-tail breach risk.
Evaluate PastWipe against a defined use case
Engage with PastWipe around technical validation, enterprise integration, partnership or a controlled evaluation focused on measurable outcomes.
Direct answers
Frequently asked questions
A concise explanation of where PastWipe fits, what RepSec means and where the technical boundaries remain.
Does PastWipe replace DLP, EDR, IAM or incident response?
No. Those controls remain essential. PastWipe adds a separate layer aimed at maintaining leverage after protected data has already moved beyond the original trust boundary.
Does PastWipe make every stolen file completely unusable?
No universal claim is credible. The achievable outcome depends on the protected format, integration, workflow, policy, available context signals and whether an unrestricted plaintext copy already exists. The objective is measurable reduction of utility and legitimate acceptance under unsupported conditions.
Is RepSec required?
No. PastWipe can operate without RepSec. RepSec is the optional protocol direction for more consistent interoperability between participating systems.
Can PastWipe work offline?
Offline operation may be possible for defined periods and policies, but it changes the trust model. Local validation, cached authority, device integrity, expiry, reconciliation and failure behaviour must be designed and tested for the specific environment.
Is this a replacement for encryption?
No. Encryption protects confidentiality when keys and access remain controlled. PastWipe addresses the additional question of whether data should still be usable when the surrounding conditions, identity, device or purpose are no longer trusted.
Evaluate post-breach control against a real workflow.
Define the data, threat, operating conditions and measurable outcome. PastWipe can then be assessed as an additional control layer—without replacing the security systems already in place and without relying on unrealistic claims.