Data Residency & Regional Processing Readiness Review

The likely issue is a contract mismatch around data residency, regional processing, storage locations, backups, logs, subprocessors, cross-border transfers, failover, deletion, observability, and migration evidence. I would first define the invariant: A residency claim is only true when every in-scope data class and processing path—including backups, telemetry, failover and operational access—matches the documented regional commitment or is explicitly excepted by the responsible policy owner. Then I would trace the smallest owning boundary, apply or propose a bounded repair/review step, and add deterministic normal, boundary, failure and replay tests. The workflow preserves documented customer commitments, privacy/security policy, retention rules, legal ownership, and availability requirements. If repository/workspace files are available, the findings can be mapped to exact paths and focused local validation; with partial evidence, the result stays an explicit diagnosis/evidence map with assumptions and no invented execution claims.