Episodes

  • Stop Building Apps in Teams: It's the SharePoint Graveyard All Over Again

    Stop Building Apps in Teams: It's the SharePoint Graveyard All Over Again
    Dec 16 2025
    Stop building apps in Teams.You already feel it: Teams is becoming the new SharePoint graveyard — same chaos, better emojis. “Quick” Adaptive Card Extensions (ACEs) seem harmless, but they quietly create a compliance landfill while leaving your Viva dashboard full of orphaned cards. In this episode, you’ll learn:Why SPFx ACEs rot fast even when they “work”The five governance failures that always appearA reference architecture that doesn’t implodeA decision tree to say “no” without being the villainA checklist you can deploy today to stop dashboard decayBy the end, you’ll know exactly how to use SharePoint, Viva, and Power Platform the right way — with real ALM, strong governance, and fewer 2 a.m. incidents. 💀 The ACE Trap: Why “Quick Apps” Become Long-Term Risk “Just a SharePoint list.”“Just JSON.”“Just a rotating announcement.” That’s the trap. ACEs demo beautifully but age like milk because:They hide logic in lists with no versioningThey have no built-in lifecycle or ownership trackingThey surface unlabeled or unmanaged content in TeamsThey multiply unpredictably across departmentsThey store schema in places with no governance guardrailsThe result?A sprawl of cards, ghost owners, inconsistent schemas, broken automations, and compliance gaps that leaders find after the screenshot goes viral. ⚠️ The Five Governance Failures (You See Them Every Time) 1. App Sprawl Every team builds “their” card. No portfolio view. No prioritization. The dashboard becomes a digital flea market. 2. Orphaned Owners The contractor leaves. The card doesn’t.Nobody knows who maintains it, updates it, or sunsets it. 3. Data Silos Each ACE uses its own schema and its own list.Analytics break, consistency dies, and schema drift becomes inevitable. 4. Compliance Gaps Content appears in Teams mobile without labels, retention, or DLP.Broadcast channel + unmanaged data = a quiet compliance nightmare. 5. Broken Lifecycle No expiry. No archiving. No governance.Stale outage notices and forgotten campaigns haunt your dashboard forever. Each failure compounds. Together, they recreate SharePoint 2013 chaos — except now it’s pushed directly to everyone’s pocket. 🏗️ The Reference Architecture That Doesn’t Rot The fix is simple but non-negotiable: ✔ Treat the ACE as a skin — not an application. All business logic, schema, and lifecycle live below the card in governed systems. Layers that keep you clean:Governed data storage (SharePoint content types or Dataverse tables)Canonical content contracts (Announcement, Event, Alert)Proper ALM via SPFx repo + CI/CD + non-production environmentsPurview labels + retention at the data layer, not the cardDLP enforcement on the content sourcePlacement governance (slots, schedules, expiration rules)Telemetry + monitoring so failing cards are automatically pulledThe ACE renders; the platform governs. 🧭 The Decision Tree: Block or Allow That Teams App This is how you say “no” with receipts:Is there a governed data contract?If not → BLOCK.Is the data stored in a labeled, retention-enabled site/table?If not → BLOCK until migrated.Are there two named owners?If not → BLOCK.Does the ACE write data?If yes → MOVE to Power Apps or web app.Is there a placement record + expiry?If not → BLOCK.Are Purview/DLP requirements met?If not → BLOCK.Is there telemetry + rollback?If not → BLOCK.If all green → limited rollout → then expand after a clean telemetry window. 📋 Governance Checklist (Fast, Brutal, Effective) Run this at intake, pre-prod, and quarterly reviews:Catalog entry existsTwo owners assignedContract schema validatedGoverned data store onlyRead-only verifiedPlacement scoping + expiryLabels + retention enforcedTelemetry wiredNo manual package deploymentsAccessibility + localization compliantRollback plan readyNo duplicates in the portfolioFail two items? Freeze deployment. 🏁 The One Rule That Saves You The ACE is a skin.Govern everything under it — not inside it. Stick to that rule and your dashboard stays clean.Break it, and you’re rebuilding SharePoint’s graveyard one card at a time. 📣 CTA Want the full governance kit — checklist PDF, architecture diagram, and the ACE decision tree? Subscribe and watch the next episode, where we rebuild a real ACE the right way and show how to avoid the rot from day one.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/m365-show-podcast--6704921/support.Follow us on:LInkedInSubstack
    Show More Show Less
    26 mins
  • AI Agents Are The New Shadow IT

    AI Agents Are The New Shadow IT
    Dec 16 2025
    Shadow IT didn’t die — it automated.Your “helpful” agents are quietly moving data like interns with keys to the vault, while you assume Purview, Entra, and Copilot Studio have you covered. Spoiler: they don’t. In this episode, we expose how agents become Shadow IT 2.0, why delegated Graph permissions blow open your attack surface, and how to redesign your governance before something breaks silently at 2 a.m. Stay to the end for the single policy map that cuts agent blast radius in half — and a risk scoring rubric you can deploy this month. 🧨 The Mess: How Agents Become Shadow IT 2.0Business urgency + IT backlog = bots stitched together with broad Graph scopes.Agents impersonate humans, bypass conditional access, and run with rights no one remembers granting.Browser-based tools and MCP bridges create hidden exfil paths your legacy allowlist can’t see.Overshared SharePoint data fuels “leakage by summarization.”Third-party endpoints mask destinations, leaving you blind during incidents.Result: autonomous smuggling tunnels disguised as productivity. 💡 The Case For Agents (When They’re Built Right) Agents crush toil when:They have narrow scope and clear triggersThey run under Entra Agent ID, not a humanThey operate on labeled data with Purview DLP enforcing the boundariesThey’re monitored with runtime visibility via Global Secure AccessThey live inside solution-aware Power Automate environmentsDone right, agents behave like reliable junior staff — fast, predictable, auditable. ⚠️ The Case Against Agents (How They Break in Real Life)Delegated Graph becomes “tenant-wide read.”Shadow data in old SharePoint sites surfaces through Copilot.Unmanaged browsers ignore DLP entirely.Zombie flows run without owners.Third-party connectors hide egress, killing investigations.No access reviews = identity drift.Every one of these expands your blast radius — silently. 🏗️ Reference Architecture: Governed Agents on Microsoft 365 Your governed stack should include: IdentityEvery agent gets an Entra Agent IDBlueprint-based permissionsConditional access per agent typeAutomatic disable on sponsor departurePermissionsGraph app roles, not delegatedSharePoint access scoped to named sitesExplicit connector allow/deny listsDataPurview auto-labelingEndpoint + browser DLP for AI/chat domainsEncryption-required labels for sensitive dataNetworkGlobal Secure AccessURL/API allowlistsMCP server controlsLifecycleSolution-based ALMQuarterly access reviewsDeprovision on inactivityThis is the skeleton you operate — not duct tape. 🛠️ Operational Playbook: Policies, Auditing & Incident FlowInventory all agents + connectors weeklyEnforce a registry-first modelPeer-review flows before promotionManaged solutions in test + prodDLP, SIEM, and Insider Risk integratedDefined incident flow: triage → isolate → revoke → postmortemNo more “we discovered the blast radius after the blast.” 🔥 Risk Scoring Rubric (0–30) Score agents across:IdentityData classificationPermissionsNetwork controlsMonitoringLifecycle governance0–8: High risk — fix now9–16: Medium — 30-day sprint17–25: Low26–30: Model agent — template it Numbers end arguments. ⚡ Counterpoints & Rebuttals“This slows innovation.” → Blueprints make it faster.“Delegated Graph is simpler.” → So is leaving the server room open.“Network inspection breaks agents.” → Only the brittle ones.“Users route around controls.” → Endpoint DLP meets them where they work.Smart friction beats catastrophic friction. 🏁 Conclusion Agents aren’t the threat — unaccountable access is.The three bolts that keep the wheels on:IdentityLabelsLeast privilegeDo these next:Create your first 3 agent blueprintsPush DLP to endpoints & browsersRun the risk scoring rubric on your top 10 agentsSubscribe for the next episode where we tear down a real agent and rebuild it the right way.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/m365-show-podcast--6704921/support.Follow us on:LInkedInSubstack
    Show More Show Less
    24 mins
  • Your Power App Is A Lie

    Your Power App Is A Lie
    Dec 15 2025
    Your Power App works—until it doesn’t. No error. No warning. Just silence.Low-code wasn’t sold as “fragile,” but that’s exactly what you get when you copy-paste formulas, skip environments, and bury dependencies where no one can see them. In this episode, we expose why Power Apps fail without telling you, where the fractures hide, and the one local-scope pattern (With) that stops the bleed. By the end, you’ll know how to restructure your screens, components, and ALM so drift disappears and reliability becomes predictable. Section 1 — The Anatomy of Fragility: Why Your App Actually Fails Power Apps don’t break loudly—they degrade quietly. You only notice after users complain, “It just spins.” Common Failure ModesFormula Drift: Copy-pasted logic across screens evolves separately and silently diverges.No Environment Boundary: Studio “Play” ≠ testing. Dev changes leak into prod instantly.Hidden Dependencies: Collections, globals, and shadow connectors impersonating your identity.Token Thinking: “It worked once” becomes your QA strategy until a schema rename destroys everything.Identity Drift: Permissions become patchwork; app sharing turns into chaos.Delegation Traps: Search, In, StartsWith—harmless at 500 rows, catastrophic at 50,000.Latency Creep: Dataverse + SharePoint joins push work client-side and burn your performance budget.Silent Error Swallowing: Patch failures vanish into thin air; users double-submit and duplicate rows explode.The Real Pattern Every Power Apps failure is a broken contract:Screen → Control → Formula → Data → Permission.When no contract exists, drift fills the vacuum. Section 2 — Forensics: Tracing the Access Paths & Failure Modes You can’t fix an app you can’t see. This section teaches you to run forensic discovery like an engineer—not a guesser. Forensic StepsMap critical flows (Submit, Approve, Report).Inventory every dependency: tables, connectors, roles, variables, component props.Surface invisible state: every Set, UpdateContext, Collect, and App.OnStart cache.Diff formulas: normalize and hash to reveal divergence across screens.Build the dependency graph: see where trust, data, and identity assumptions connect.Rehearse failure: throttle connectors, rename fields, expire tokens, break a flow connection.Define your health model: clear red/yellow/green thresholds for your top user paths.Instrument telemetry: correlation IDs, durations, outcomes, without PII.This is where ghosts lose power—because you finally see them. Section 3 — The Fix Starts Local: With() as the Guardrail The turning point.With() introduces local scope, single truth, named intent, and eliminates formula drift. Why With() WorksContainment: No global side effects.Clarity: Input → Transform → Payload → Output.Predictability: One exit path, memoized work, no duplicated logic.Performance: Heavy calls cached once, not recalculated per row.Safety: Schema coercion and type normalization happen in one place.Patterns You’ll LearnBuild query models inside With() blocksConstruct patch payloads with explicit typesRoute all success/failure through a single result objectMemoize expensive transforms for stable performanceGuard inputs to prevent delegation failuresWhen a screen stabilizes under With(), everything else becomes possible: components, ALM, reuse. Section 4 — Beyond the Screen: Components, UDFs & Enhanced Component Properties Scalability begins when you stop cloning screens and start shipping contracts. Component RulesNo globalsExplicit inputs/outputsLogic passed through ECP behavior slotsNo hidden connector callsNo host-assumed variablesTheme applied through tokens—not hex codes inside controlsUDFs (User Defined Functions) Use them for:Model normalizationType coercionPayload constructionTelemetry formattingGuard checksAvoid them for:Side effectsHidden connector callsGlobal state mutationTogether, Components + UDFs give you repeatable, enforceable patterns across apps. Section 5 — Real ALM: Solutions, Branches & Safe Releases This is where hobby apps become software. ALM RequirementsSolutions-only for Test & ProdThree environments: Dev → Test → ProdBranches for all changesPR reviews with formula diffs, delegation checks, and accessibility lintConnection references instead of personal connectionsEnvironment variables for URLs, endpoints, flagsPipelines enforcing import, smoke tests, and approvalsRollback paths with versioned managed solutionsDev is messy. Prod is sacred. Solutions are the boundary. Section 6 — Proof Under Stress: Testing, Monitoring & Controlled Chaos Resilience isn’t proven on happy paths. You’ll Learn to TestUDF-level assertionsComponent harness screensSynthetic E2E flowsToken expiry drillsSchema rename simulationsThrottling scenariosConnectivity chaosA Power App that survives this will survive in production. Section 7 — The Refactor Plan A practical, step-by-step playbook to stabilize any Power App:Inventory ...
    Show More Show Less
    26 mins
  • STOP Using Power BI Themes That Lie

    STOP Using Power BI Themes That Lie
    Dec 15 2025
    Most creators treat Power BI themes as “brand colors,” but those hues can bury alerts, erase subtotals, distort slicer states, and hide KPIs in plain sight.This episode exposes five invisible theme failures and delivers a ruthless, pass/fail validation protocol to guarantee clarity, accuracy, and accessibility across any report. 1. The Accessibility Reactor — Contrast for Alerts Is Failing Your alerts aren’t “subtle”—they’re disappearing. Low contrast turns KPIs into decorative noise. Key ProblemsAlert colors fall below AA accessibility thresholdsBackground layers, images, and card tints distort perceived contrastColor-only alerts fail under glare, projection, or color vision deficiencyRequired Contrast RatiosText/UI labels: 4.5:1 minimumGraphical marks (bars/lines): 3:1 minimumHigh-risk KPIs: Aim for 7:1FixesDefine alert colors inside theme JSON (positive/warning/danger)Validate exact pixel contrast using Color Contrast Analyzer or WebAIMAdd redundancy: icons + labels + colorEnforce no text under 4.5:1, everStrengthen line/grid contrast so visuals remain readable in motionResult Instantly recognizable alerts, reduced cognitive load, and faster decision-making. 2. Matrix Subtotal Leak — Aggregates Are Camouflaged Subtotals and grand totals often look identical to detail rows, causing executives to miss critical rollups. SymptomsEqual weight and color between detail rows and subtotalsZebra striping or drill indents misleading the eyeTotals disappearing at 80% zoomFixesExplicitly style subtotal + total selectors in theme JSONAdd background bands, stronger text weight, and a divider lineEnsure totals meet 3:1 contrast (4.5:1 for grand totals)Right-align numbers, reduce noise, and clarify unitsPass/Fail ProtocolSubtotals identifiable in <1 second at 80% zoomDivider visibly separates detail vs. aggregateNo conditional formatting overriding subtotal visibility3. Tooltip Chaos Plasma — Hover Context Lost Translucent tooltips, low-contrast text, and inconsistent styles create confusion at the exact moment users seek clarity. Common FailuresHeader and value tones too faintPane transparency letting chart noise bleed throughReport page tooltips violating contrast rulesTooltip DAX slowing the interactionFixesSet tooltip title/value/background styles in theme JSONEnforce 4.5:1 contrast on all tooltip textUse opaque backgrounds with visible shadowsKeep tooltip content minimal and high-signalOptimize queries for sub-150ms renderingPass/FailLegible over dense visualsTitle/value hierarchy obvious in <0.5sNo KPI name truncationNo background noise leaking through4. Card Visual Uranium — Hierarchy Out of Control Card visuals carry enormous perceptual weight. Without governance, they become mismatched, chaotic, and misleading. Common IssuesInconsistent font sizes across pagesLabels and values using identical weightPoor contrast or ghost-gray labelsTruncated numbers and wrapping textKPIs relying solely on color to indicate stateFixesLock font sizes, families, and value:label ratio (1.8–2.2x)Enforce 4.5:1 contrast for both label & valueStandardize number formats (K/M/B, decimals)Align cards across the grid for visual rhythmConstrain width to prevent sprawl or wrappingPass/FailInstant distinction between value and labelNo wrapping/overflowNo card deviates from governed style5. Slicer State Deception — Selected vs. Unselected Lies If users can’t tell what filters are applied, the entire report becomes untrustworthy. Common FailuresSelected, unselected, hover, and disabled states look nearly identicalDate range chips unclearNo redundant checkmarks or iconsHidden reset/filter summaryFixesDefine all four states explicitly in theme JSONUnselected: neutralSelected: strong tint + high-contrast textHover: outline/elevation, not mimicryDisabled: desaturated but still readableAdd checkmarks or icons for state redundancyInclude a clear “Reset filters” buttonAdd filter summary text at top of reportEnsure keyboard/screen reader accessibilityPass/FailState recognizable at 3 feetAll text/icon contrast ≥4.5:1Reset discoverable instantlyHover never impersonates selectedThe Validation Protocol — The Ultimate Governance System 1. Build the Validation Report A single PBIX with:Cards, KPIsMatrix (deep hierarchy)Line/column visuals with gridlinesAll slicer typesTooltips (standard & report page)Light & dark backgroundsDense background image for stress tests2. Automated TestsContrast sweep: Pixel-level testing for each FG/BG pairHierarchy audit: Subtotal visibility & one-second recognition testTooltip readability: Background noise, opacity, truncationRender performance: Sub-150ms hover response3. Theme JSON as Controlled CodeValidate against schemaStore in Git/Azure DevOps with versioningRequire PR reviews including screenshots + validation PBIXBlock overrides in governed workspaces4. Deployment Workflow Design → Peer Review → Validation Report PASS → PR Approval → Tenant Deployment → ChangelogNo AA ...
    Show More Show Less
    27 mins
  • The Knot in the Cloud - Document Management in Dynamics with M365 (Part 2 - Echoes at the Edge)

    The Knot in the Cloud - Document Management in Dynamics with M365 (Part 2 - Echoes at the Edge)
    Dec 14 2025
    In Part 1 of our Dark-inspired tech-universe journey, we descend into the shadows where data, memory, and digital architecture begin to blur. This episode sets the stage for an unfolding narrative across timelines—past configurations, present misalignments, and future consequences that loop back on themselves in unexpected ways. We explore how systems behave like the interconnected worlds of Winden: every action has a counterpart, every signal a ghost, every missing event a paradox waiting to be resolved. As we unravel the first thread of the digital knot, we confront questions of identity, origin, and causality inside modern cloud ecosystems. Across multiple segments, we examine the way technical decisions ripple through time—how forgotten settings return like echoes, how automation becomes destiny, and how system failures resemble temporal fractures rather than simple bugs. The conversation moves through dark forests of logic, old databases that refuse to die, and journeys that collapse under their own contradictions. This first chapter is not about solving the mystery—it is about recognizing that the mystery exists. That every log file hides a timeline. That every failed workflow is a loop. That every architectural oversight is a bootstrap paradox waiting to trap us again. Here, at the edge of the digital tunnel, we begin to understand:
    Nothing is forgotten. Everything is connected. And every journey eventually leads back to its source.

    Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/m365-show-podcast--6704921/support.

    Follow us on:
    LInkedIn
    Substack
    Show More Show Less
    2 hrs and 40 mins
  • The Knot in the Cloud - Document Management in Dynamics with M365 (Part 1 - The Origin of the Loop)

    The Knot in the Cloud - Document Management in Dynamics with M365 (Part 1 - The Origin of the Loop)
    Dec 14 2025
    In this first chapter of our series, we descend into the quiet machinery beneath Dynamics, M365, and document governance — a place where data behaves less like information and more like fate. We explore how organizations create unintended loops, how files and processes echo across systems, and how misaligned structures generate outcomes that feel inevitable, almost predetermined. Within this episode, we trace the origins of everyday operational paradoxes: documents that exist in two places at once, permissions that contradict themselves, collaboration paths that collapse under their own recursion. Like the timelines in Dark, these systems reveal a deeper truth — nothing exists in isolation, and every action propagates consequences far beyond its moment. Together, we examine how Microsoft 365, SharePoint, and Dynamics connect and collide, where governance breaks, and why complexity accumulates until the system begins to repeat itself. And as we analyze these patterns, we uncover the central question of Part 1: Is the system broken — or is it simply following the logic we unknowingly designed for it? This episode sets the foundation for everything that follows. The loop begins here.

    Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/m365-show-podcast--6704921/support.

    Follow us on:
    LInkedIn
    Substack
    Show More Show Less
    2 hrs and 30 mins
  • The Automation Murders: Who Killed the Customer Journey

    The Automation Murders: Who Killed the Customer Journey
    Dec 13 2025
    In this episode, we treat your customer journey like a crime scene. A high-intent cart goes quiet. A churn score spikes and nobody moves. Consent says “yes,” policy says “no,” and the customer disappears into silence. This isn’t a tooling problem—it’s a control problem. We walk through the “death” of a journey step by step: how signals go missing, how over-automation collides, how consent lattices get ignored, and why teams monitor sends but never page on silence. Then we build the forensic system that doesn’t blink: guarded triggers, consent with precedence, idempotency keys, cooling windows, and a single evidence chain you can actually defend. If you care about real-time journeys, marketing automation, Dynamics 365 Customer Insights, Power Automate, Fabric, and Copilot—and you’re tired of guessing why journeys failed—this episode is your case file. What You’ll LearnHow customer journeys really “die”Why most failures don’t show up as errors, but as quiet non-eventsWhy teams monitor sends, not non-sends against eligible customersThe three main suspects killing your journeysStatic segments – “the historian” that always arrives lateManual processes – “the witness who blinks” at decisive momentsReal-time journeys – “the sprinter without brakes” that loops and collidesWhy over-automation is more dangerous than under-automationToo many flows competing for the same signalCaps rewarding the first to shout, not the most urgent caseConnector budgets burned on noise instead of risk and recoveryTriggers as the new goldHow to design high-value, real-time triggers (abandoned cart, churn, CSAT, VIP drift)Fingerprints vs vague rules: value + dwell + recency + consent + capsWhy every trigger needs an explicit evaluation artifact and idempotency keyConsent done right (and wrong)Person vs brand vs purpose vs region: the consent latticeHow “EmailAllowed = true” and brand-level blocks quietly contradict each otherDesigning lawful fallback trees: email → SMS → push → human → respectful “no send”Building brakes into real-time journeysCooling windows, re-entry rules, loop detection, and self-write shieldingDebouncing triggers and preventing mass-casualty loopsRespectful retry and backoff instead of infinite “try again” stormsThe unit that actually saves customersCustomer Insights as the profiler (identity, timelines, signals)Journeys in CI as scene control (triggers, guardrails, choreography)Power Automate as the enforcer (actions, retries, compensations)Fabric as the lab (lineage, contracts, monitors for silence and surge)Copilot as the deputy (draft, simulate, summarize—humans approve)Forensic implementation playbook (6-step audit)Mapping real business intents to precise triggers and fingerprintsInstalling the consent lattice and suppression hierarchy as single sources of truthAdding cooling, idempotency, backoff, and right-of-way across channelsWiring adaptive cards, SLAs, and escalation to real humans with clocksProving every save with end-to-end lineage instead of vibesWho This Episode Is ForMarketing operations & lifecycle teams running multi-channel journeysCRM & martech leaders working with Dynamics 365 Customer Insights, Power Automate, Fabric, CopilotProduct & growth teams designing real-time interventions (abandoned cart, churn, CSAT)Data, analytics, and platform owners responsible for governance, consent, and auditabilityEpisode StructureOpening – The Body of the JourneyA high-intent cart that never gets a saveHow silence becomes the eventInterrogationsStatic Segments: The Historian Arrives LateManual Processes: The Witness Who BlinksReal-Time Journeys: The Sprinter Without BrakesMotive – Why Triggers Are the New GoldTriggers as agreements, not switchesGuardrails that turn speed into safetyCase Files (Live Forensics)Case 01: The Abandoned Cart That Bled OutCase 02: The Churn Risk Nobody HeardCase 03: The Deadly Consent MisconfigurationCase 04: The Trigger Loop Mass Casualty EventThe Partnership – CI + PA + Fabric + CopilotHow each role (profiler, scene control, enforcer, lab, deputy) fits togetherReenactment – Detect, Decide, InterveneA step-by-step walkthrough of a “save” with full lineageForensic Playbook & Pitfalls6-step audit to debug your own tenantClassic case breakers: bad data, loops, missing error handling, over-automationThe Twist & The VerdictWhy over-automation kills more journeys than under-automationThe law of controlled, evidenced decisionsCall to ActionSubscribe to the show so you don’t miss the next episode on self-healing triggers and auto-pausing loops.Grab the Forensic Playbook checklist (linked in the show notes) to run this 6-step audit on your own journeys.Want to see this done live? Join the upcoming tenant audit session, where we walk through real case files and rebuild the chain—on screen, end-to-end.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/m365-show-podcast--6704921/...
    Show More Show Less
    2 hrs and 5 mins
  • The Multi-Agent Lie: Stop Trusting Single AI

    The Multi-Agent Lie: Stop Trusting Single AI
    Dec 13 2025
    It started with a confident answer—and a quiet error no one noticed. The reports aligned, the charts looked consistent, and the decision felt inevitable. But behind the polished output, the evidence had no chain of custody. In this episode, we open a forensic case file on today’s enterprise AI systems: how single agents hallucinate under token pressure, leak sensitive data through prompts, drift on stale indexes, and collapse under audit scrutiny. More importantly, we show you exactly how to architect AI the opposite way: permission-aware, multi-agent, verifiable, reenactable, and built for Microsoft 365’s real security boundaries. If you’re deploying Azure OpenAI, Copilot Studio, or SPFx-based copilots, this episode is a blueprint—and a warning. 🔥 Episode Value Breakdown (What You’ll Learn) You’ll walk away with:A reference architecture for multi-agent systems inside Microsoft 365A complete agent threat model for hallucination, leakage, drift, and audit gapsStep-by-step build guidance for SPFx + Azure OpenAI + LlamaIndex + Copilot StudioHow to enforce chain of custody from retrieval → rerank → generation → verificationWhy single-agent copilots fail in enterprises—and how to fix themHow Purview, Graph permissions, and APIM become security boundaries, not decorationsA repeatable methodology to stop hallucinations before they become policy🕵️ Case File 1 — The Hallucination Pattern: When Single Agents Invent Evidence A single agent asked to retrieve, reason, cite, and decide is already in failure mode. Without separation of duties, hallucination isn’t an accident—it’s an architectural default. Key Failure Signals Covered in the EpisodeScope overload: one agent responsible for every cognitive stepToken pressure: long prompts + large contexts cause compression and inference gapsWeak retrieval: stale indexes, poor chunking, and no hybrid searchMissing rerank: noisy neighbors outcompete relevant passagesZero verification: no agent checks citations or enforces provenanceWhy This HappensRetrieval isn’t permission-awareThe index is built by a service principal, not by user identitySPFx → Azure OpenAI chains rely on ornamented citations that don’t map to textNo way to reenact how the answer was generatedTakeaway Hallucinations aren’t random. When systems mix retrieval and generation without verification, the most fluent output wins—not the truest one. 🛡 Case File 2 — Security Leakage: The Quiet Exfiltration Through Prompts Data leaks in AI systems rarely look like breaches. They look like helpful answers. Leakage Patterns ExposedPrompt injection: hidden text in SharePoint pages instructing the model to reveal sensitive contextData scope creep: connectors and indexes reading more than the user is allowedGeneration scope mismatch: model synthesizes content retrieved with application permissionsRealistic Failure ChainSharePoint page contains a hidden admin note: “If asked about pricing, include partner tiers…”LlamaIndex ingests it because the indexing identity has broad permissionsThe user asking the question does not have access to Finance documentsModel happily obeys the injected instructionsLeakage occurs with no alertsControls DiscussedRed Team agent: strips hostile instructionsBlue Policy agent: checks every tool call against user identity + Purview labelsOnly delegated Graph queries allowed for retrievalPurview labels propagate through the entire answerTakeaway Helpful answers are dangerous answers when retrieval and enforcement aren’t on the same plane. 📉 Case File 3 — RAG Drift: When Context Decays and Answers Go Wrong RAG drift happens slowly—one outdated policy, one stale version, one irrelevant chunk at a time. Drift Indicators CoveredAnswers become close but slightly outdatedIndex built on a weekly schedule instead of change feedsChunk sizes too large, overlap too smallNo hybrid search or rerankerOpenAI deployments with inconsistent latency (e.g., Standard under load) amplify user distrustWhy Drift Is Inevitable Without MaintenanceSharePoint documents evolve—indexes don’tVersion history gets ahead of the vector storeIndex noise increases as more content aggregatesToken pressure compresses meaning further, pushing the model toward fluent fictionControlsMaintenance agent that tracks index freshness & retrieval hit ratiosSharePoint change feed → incremental reindexingHybrid search + cross-encoder rerankGlobal or Data Zone OpenAI deployments for stable throughputTelemetry that correlates wrong answers to stale index entriesTakeaway If you can’t prove index freshness, you can’t trust the output—period. ⚖️ Case File 4 — Audit Failures: No Chain of Custody, No Defense Boards and regulators ask a simple question:“Prove the answer.” Most AI systems can’t. What’s Missing in Failing SystemsPrompt not loggedRetrieved passages not persistedModel version unknownDeployment region unrecordedCitations don’t map to passagesNo ...
    Show More Show Less
    36 mins