Know What Sensitive Context Exists—and Where Monitored Application Activity Is Trying to Go

Map Impact Context Without Turning Digital Intelligence Into a Copy of Customer Records

Security teams need to know whether an incident touches important business or regulated data context, but collecting the raw data itself can create a new problem.

The Sensitive Data Map stores classification context, customer-supplied labels, bounded metadata, and one-way resource fingerprints. It can describe mapped application locations such as tables, forms, upload paths, API routes, or custom contexts, then correlate that classification with monitored events, actors, destinations, and investigations.

See Where Monitored SaaS Application Activity Communicated

Application egress becomes more useful when the destination is connected to the component, request, execution, actor, baseline history, incident, and protected-data context around it.

Digital Intelligence can show destination activity in a selected UTC evidence window, the lifetime and in-window observation context, the component or request associated with the activity, bytes observed sent where the sensor records that metadata, and whether a containment action exists for the destination.

First-seen activity can be important because it is new, but “new” is a property of tenant history—not a synonym for malicious. The product keeps novelty, trust context, and immutable event proof separate so analysts can investigate the change without jumping directly to intent.

Add Browser-Side Context for Scripts, Forms, Resources, and CSP Observations

Server-side application evidence cannot answer every browser-side question. Browser Trust adds bounded metadata that can help investigate third-party script behavior and external destinations without trying to become a browser EDR.

Browser destinations can also be grouped by tenant-learned trust or novelty context such as expected, unknown, novel, rare, or unusual. A first-seen browser destination still requires evidence and business context before an analyst can decide whether it is expected, suspicious, or malicious.

Follow Data-Movement Context Back to Immutable Proof

The product’s data-movement story is strongest when each layer can return to the event that supports it.

For server-side egress, the chain is designed around actor or component → request or route → immutable outbound event → external destination → tenant destination history → potential sensitive-data context → investigation. For browser evidence, the chain becomes browser metadata → external destination → novelty or trust context → related deterministic investigation → immutable browser observation.

This lets a security analyst move from a destination card into the Evidence Ledger instead of relying on a summarized risk label. If the activity contributes to a larger attack story, it can also be reviewed in Investigations.

Mark Exact Behavior as Expected Without Erasing the Evidence

Browser and destination workflows can feed supervised trust decisions when an analyst has enough context to classify exact behavior.

Decisions such as expected change, known integration, temporary exact allow, or exact behavior allow are intended to stay narrowly scoped. The immutable evidence remains unchanged, and high-risk deterministic evidence is not supposed to disappear simply because an analyst taught the system that a different exact behavior is familiar.

For the full trust model, including exact-scope fingerprints, expiry, decision history, and tenant-specific learning, see Behavior & Trust.