Episode 45 — Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Proofs for i1
Recovery objectives translate business tolerance into technical targets. Recovery Point Objective (R P O) defines how much data you can afford to lose, and Recovery Time Objective (R T O) defines how long you can afford to wait. These numbers guide backup frequency, replication design, and staffing for after-hours response. A clinic that can tolerate one hour of record loss sets a different R P O than a lab that cannot lose a single test result. Objectives must be realistic, funded, and visible to teams that implement them. They also need periodic review as products, volumes, and regulations change. When disagreements surface, decide early; vague goals cause brittle designs. Clear R P O and R T O convert vague hope into measurable engineering choices and create the yardstick for later testing.
A sound backup strategy turns objectives into repeatable protection. Define what is backed up, how often, where copies live, and how long they are kept. Choose full, differential, or incremental patterns that meet your R P O without overwhelming storage or networks. Capture configuration and infrastructure definitions alongside data so rebuilt systems behave as intended. Include databases, file stores, virtual machines, and key platform states like access policies and certificates. Document service-level targets for backup completion and alert on failures or slow jobs. Separate roles for requesting restores and approving them, especially for sensitive sets. Track coverage with dashboards that report success rates and age of last good copy. Backups are not a single product; they are a discipline that keeps pace with change, or else they quietly fall behind.
Immutable copies and offline options reduce the chance that the same event that harms production will poison recovery. Immutable storage prevents modification or deletion within a fixed window, resisting ransomware and accidental cleanup. Offline or logically isolated copies break the blast radius by removing direct control paths from compromised accounts. Test the path to these copies so access works under stress without weakening isolation. Keep retention windows aligned to detection realities; if threats hide for weeks, short windows may be useless. Label which datasets require immutability and which can rely on standard protections. Record proof that immutability is active, not just configured once. The combination of write-once controls and isolation buys time to investigate, choose the safest restore point, and rebuild with confidence.
Alternate workarounds and manual procedures keep essential functions moving while systems return. Identify processes that can operate in a reduced mode—paper intake, offline appointment verification, or cached reference data—and write simple, step-by-step guides. Limit manual steps to the minimum necessary and define reconciliation tasks to reenter data once systems recover. Train staff with short drills so the instructions are muscle memory, not a new burden during stress. Store forms, contact numbers, and instructions in places reachable without network access. Include criteria for switching to manual mode and for switching back, with clear authority for the decision. Workarounds are a bridge, not a parallel system; they should be safe, auditable, and temporary so risk does not grow in the shadows.
Third-party services and shared responsibility require explicit expectations. For each vendor that hosts data, processes transactions, or provides core platforms, document who backs up what, how failover works, and how you will be notified during incidents. Capture the provider’s R P O and R T O and compare them to your needs; gaps need compensating controls or contract updates. Test joint procedures, such as coordinated restore or region failover, and record evidence of success or limits. Track dependencies on provider identity, keys, or certificates that could block recovery. Maintain a contact register with escalation paths, after-hours options, and agreed communication channels. Shared responsibility is not a slogan; it is a checklist of who acts, when, and with which proof. Clarity here prevents finger-pointing when time is critical.
Evidence closes the loop between intent and operation. Useful proofs include backup job reports, screenshots of immutable settings, restore logs with durations and checksums, ticket timelines, and sign-offs from business owners confirming service readiness. Keep monthly bundles that summarize coverage, failures, fixes, and test results, and store them in a controlled repository with access logs. Automate exports where possible to avoid manual gaps. During reviews, present evidence in the order of the recovery story: objectives, dependencies, backups, restores, validation, and communications. The goal is not volume but clarity—artifacts that answer “what, where, when, who, and with what outcome.” When evidence is routine, audits move quickly and teams spend time improving rather than compiling.
Improvement tracking and follow through turn test findings into stronger posture. After each exercise or real event, capture issues, root causes, and small corrective actions with owners and due dates. Prioritize items that reduce time to recover or increase confidence in restore integrity. Track completion in the same system that holds incident records, and review progress in regular governance meetings. Retire temporary exceptions and verify that changes land in runbooks, scripts, and architecture diagrams. Celebrate measurable gains—shorter restore times, higher success rates, clearer instructions—so momentum grows. Improvement is not a quarterly slogan; it is a monthly rhythm that keeps continuity current as systems and teams evolve.
