Authority boundaries: defining who owns what (and why it prevents outages)
A practical way to document authority boundaries between internal IT, MSPs, and security vendors—so changes are controlled and auditable.
Why authority boundaries matter
Most operational failures in managed environments come from uncoordinated change. When multiple parties can modify identity, endpoint policies, patch schedules, or remote-access tooling, the environment becomes unpredictable.
Authority boundaries are a control: they reduce risk by making ownership explicit and enforceable.
The minimal boundary matrix
Document four items for each domain:
- Authoritative system (source of truth)
- Who can change it
- Approval path
- Evidence artifact (how you prove what changed)
Example domains to include:
- Identity (MFA, conditional access, privileged access)
- Endpoint configuration (baselines, hardening, settings)
- Patch management (rings, maintenance windows, deferrals)
- Security tools (EDR, log sources, alert routing)
- Remote access (VPN/ZTNA, device posture requirements)
A supportable standard
Use a simple statement format:
- Authoritative for:
- Allowed changes by: <team/vendor>
- Requires approval from:
- Evidence stored in:
Keep it short enough that it is actually used.
What to enforce technically
Documentation is necessary—but you also want guardrails:
- Least privilege for vendor accounts
- Change tickets for scheduled procedures
- Exported policy baselines on a cadence
- Alerting on high-impact configuration changes
Quick checklist
- Single source of truth per control domain
- Written approval path and escalation owner
- Evidence artifacts stored where leadership can audit
- Access rights match the boundary document
- Document ownership boundaries.
- Stage changes and verify outcomes.
- Measure and report monthly.
We can translate these controls into a staged plan with verification steps for your environment.