<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Conformance on Sakura Sky: Cloud, Data, Security</title><link>https://www.sakurasky.com/tags/conformance/</link><description>Recent content in Conformance on Sakura Sky: Cloud, Data, Security</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><copyright>Sakura Sky</copyright><lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 -0400</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.sakurasky.com/tags/conformance/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The GATE Conformance Runner: What You Can Automate and What You Cannot</title><link>https://www.sakurasky.com/blog/gate-conformance-runner/</link><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate><guid>https://www.sakurasky.com/blog/gate-conformance-runner/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Most compliance tooling works in binary. A check passes or it fails. That binary is comfortable for auditors and uncomfortable for engineers, because it hides the question that matters most: did the tool actually verify the thing, or did it just find no evidence of failure?&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>