vaultsovereign/test
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
Files
master
test/VAULTMESH-ETERNAL-PATTERN/funding-roadmap/pqc-integration/PQC_KPI_Dashboard.md
Vault Sovereign 1583890199 Initial commit - combined iTerm2 scripts 
Contains:
- 1m-brag
- tem
- VaultMesh_Catalog_v1
- VAULTMESH-ETERNAL-PATTERN

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2025-12-28 03:58:39 +00:00

12 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

PQC Integration — KPI Dashboard

Proposal: €2.8M HORIZON-CL3-2025-CS-ECCC-06 Version: 1.0 Date: 2025-11-06 Owner: VaultMesh Technologies B.V. (Coordinator)

Overview

This dashboard defines quantitative and qualitative Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) aligned with Horizon Europe evaluation criteria (Excellence 30%, Impact 30%, Implementation 40%).

Measurement approach:

  • Baseline: Current state (TRL 4, existing VaultMesh node)
  • Target: End of project (M24, TRL 6)
  • Verification: How we prove the target was achieved
  • Frequency: How often we measure during project

Excellence KPIs (Technical Innovation & Methodology)

E1: Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Progression

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
TRL Level 4 (Lab validation) 6 (Pilot validation) Independent TRL audit by external evaluator M12, M24
PQC Algorithms Integrated 0 3 (Kyber, Dilithium, SPHINCS+) Code repository tags + unit test coverage Monthly
Receipt Throughput 1,000 receipts/day 10,000 receipts/day Benchmark tests (D2.2) Quarterly
Merkle Tree Depth 5 levels (36 manifests) 8 levels (256 manifests) Compaction efficiency metrics Monthly

Success Criteria: TRL 6 achieved if ≥2/3 pilot sites validate system in operational environment.

E2: Scientific Publications & Dissemination

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Peer-Reviewed Publications 0 10+ (top-tier venues: IEEE S&P, ACM CCS, Usenix Security) DOI links in D5.3 M12: 3, M18: 7, M24: 10+
Conference Presentations 0 5+ (invited talks at ETSI TC CYBER, IETF CFRG) Presentation slides + recordings Quarterly
Technical Reports 0 3 (D2.3, D3.3, D4.3) Submitted to EU Open Research Repository Per deliverable
Open-Source Contributions 1 repo (vaultmesh-core) 5+ repos (sealer, verifier, psi-field, router, pilots) GitHub stars (target: 500+), forks (target: 50+) Monthly

Success Criteria: ≥8 publications in top-tier venues (h-index ≥30) by M24.

E3: Standards Contributions

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Standards Drafts Submitted 0 5+ (ETSI, IETF, ISO/IEC) Draft IDs + submission confirmations (D5.2) M18: 2, M24: 5+
Working Group Participation 0 3+ (ETSI TC CYBER, IETF CFRG, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27) Meeting attendance records Quarterly
Reference Implementation Adoption 0 3+ organizations test VaultMesh PQC sealer Community feedback + GitHub issues M18, M24

Success Criteria: ≥3 standards drafts accepted for working group review by M24.

Impact KPIs (Societal & Economic Value)

I1: Compliance Cost Reduction

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Audit Hours Saved per Incident 0% (no baseline) 30% reduction vs. manual audit Pilot benchmarks (D5.1): time to verify receipt chain vs. manual log review Pilot phase (M12-M24)
Receipt Verification Time N/A <5 seconds per receipt (Merkle proof) Performance benchmarks (D2.2) Quarterly
Cost per Receipt (€) €0 (no TSA/blockchain yet) <€0.01 per receipt (batched anchoring) Monthly TSA/blockchain invoices Monthly
Audit Trail Completeness 85% (current VaultMesh node) 99%+ (LAWCHAIN + TSA anchoring) Pilot assessments (D5.1) Pilot phase

Success Criteria: ≥2/3 pilot sites report ≥25% audit cost reduction vs. their current systems.

I2: Incident Response Improvement

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Incident Detection Time N/A (no Ψ-Field yet) 50% faster vs. manual monitoring Pilot logs (D5.1): time from anomaly to alert Pilot phase
False Positive Rate N/A <10% (Ψ-Field tuned thresholds) Pilot feedback + precision/recall metrics Monthly (pilot phase)
Forensic Query Speed N/A <10 seconds (LAWCHAIN indexed queries) Benchmarks (D4.2) Quarterly

Success Criteria: ≥1/3 pilot sites demonstrate ≥40% faster incident detection with <15% false positive rate.

I3: Adoption & Dissemination

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Open-Source Downloads ~100/month (current vaultmesh-core) 500+ post-M24 (cumulative over 6 months post-project) GitHub Insights, Docker Hub pulls Monthly
Pilot Participants 0 15+ peers (5 per pilot site: France, Czech, Greece) Pilot deployment reports (D5.1) M12: 5, M18: 10, M24: 15+
Training Workshops 0 3+ (1 per pilot region) Attendance lists + materials published M15, M18, M21
Media Coverage 0 5+ articles (tech press, cybersecurity blogs) Links collected in D5.3 M12: 1, M18: 3, M24: 5+

Success Criteria: ≥400 downloads and ≥12 pilot peers by M24.

I4: Sovereignty Enhancement

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Cross-Border Federation Nodes 0 15+ (across 3 countries) Federation testbed logs (D4.2) M12: 5, M18: 10, M24: 15+
Sovereign Data Exchange (no third-party cloud) 0% 100% (mTLS peer-to-peer) Architecture review (D1.2) + pilot deployments Pilot phase
GDPR Compliance Partial (current node) Full (GDPR Art. 5(1)(f), Art. 25 compliance) Legal review + ethics assessment (D5.3) M10, M24

Success Criteria: ≥12 federation nodes operational with 100% peer-to-peer exchange (no third-party intermediaries).

Implementation KPIs (Management & Execution)

IM1: Deliverable Completion

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Deliverables Submitted On-Time N/A 100% (13/13 deliverables by deadline) EU portal submission confirmations Per deliverable
Deliverable Quality (EU Review) N/A Average ≥4/5 stars (if EU provides feedback) EU reviewer comments M12, M24
Public Deliverables N/A 9/13 deliverables (DMP, reports, standards drafts) Open access repository Per deliverable

Deliverable List (13 total):

  • WP1: D1.1 (M3), D1.2 (M6)
  • WP2: D2.1 (M8), D2.2 (M11), D2.3 (M14)
  • WP3: D3.1 (M10), D3.2 (M14), D3.3 (M16)
  • WP4: D4.1 (M12), D4.2 (M16), D4.3 (M18)
  • WP5: D5.1 (M20), D5.2 (M22), D5.3 (M24)

Success Criteria: ≥12/13 deliverables on-time, ≥8/9 public deliverables accessible via Open Access.

IM2: Budget & Resource Management

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Budget Burn Rate 0% Linear burn (±10% variance per quarter) Financial reports to EU Quarterly
Person-Months Allocated 0 PM 104 PM total (VaultMesh: 44, Brno: 24, Cyber Trust: 30, France: 18) Timesheet reports Monthly
Contingency Budget Used 0% <50% (€140K of €280K contingency) Steering committee approvals Monthly
Cost Overruns N/A 0 WPs exceed budget by >15% Partner financial statements Quarterly

Success Criteria: ≤10% variance from planned budget per WP, <50% contingency used.

IM3: Consortium Coordination

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
Steering Committee Meetings 0 24+ (monthly for 24 months) Meeting minutes Monthly
Partner Attendance Rate N/A ≥90% (all 4 partners attend ≥22/24 meetings) Attendance logs Monthly
Conflict Resolution Time N/A <2 weeks (escalations resolved within 2 weeks) Conflict log (internal) As needed
Knowledge Transfer Events 0 6+ (workshops, joint debugging sessions) Event reports Quarterly

Success Criteria: ≥90% attendance, no unresolved conflicts lasting >1 month.

IM4: Risk Mitigation Effectiveness

Metric Baseline (M0) Target (M24) Verification Method Measurement Frequency
High Risks (Score ≥6) 0 0 (no critical blockers by M24) Risk register updates Monthly
Risks Closed 0 ≥5/15 risks closed as mitigated/irrelevant Risk register Quarterly
Risks Escalated to EU N/A 0 (all handled internally) EU correspondence As needed

Success Criteria: No high-risk items at M24, ≥5 risks closed, 0 escalations to EU.

Summary KPI Table (For Part B Section 2.1)

Category KPI Baseline Target (M24) Verification
Excellence TRL Level 4 6 External TRL audit
Excellence Publications 0 10+ (top-tier) DOI links
Excellence Standards Drafts 0 5+ (ETSI/IETF/ISO) Draft IDs
Impact Audit Cost Reduction 0% 30% Pilot benchmarks (D5.1)
Impact Incident Detection N/A 50% faster Pilot logs
Impact Open-Source Downloads ~100/mo 500+ post-M24 GitHub Insights
Impact Federation Nodes 0 15+ (3 countries) Testbed logs (D4.2)
Implementation Deliverables On-Time N/A 100% (13/13) EU portal confirmations
Implementation Budget Variance N/A ≤10% per WP Financial reports
Implementation Steering Attendance N/A ≥90% Attendance logs

KPI Dashboard Access

During Project:

  • Consortium Portal: Real-time KPI tracking via Mattermost/NextCloud dashboard
  • Monthly Steering Calls: Review 3-5 priority KPIs per call
  • Quarterly Reports: Full KPI table in EU periodic reports

Public KPIs (Post-M24):

  • Open-source downloads (GitHub Insights public)
  • Publications (DOI links in Open Access repos)
  • Standards contributions (ETSI/IETF public drafts)

Reviewer Notes

For Part B Section 2.1 (Pathways to Impact):

"The project defines 18 quantitative KPIs across Excellence, Impact, and Implementation dimensions. Key targets include: TRL 4→6 progression validated by external audit; 10+ top-tier publications; 5+ standards contributions; 30% audit cost reduction in pilots; 50% faster incident detection; 500+ open-source downloads post-project; 15+ federation nodes across 3 countries; 100% deliverable on-time completion; ≤10% budget variance. Monthly KPI tracking via consortium portal ensures proactive management and timely course corrections."

For reviewers evaluating Impact (30% of score):

  • Shows concrete, measurable outcomes (not vague "we will contribute to...")
  • Demonstrates realistic targets (30% cost reduction, not 90%)
  • Proves systematic measurement plan (verification methods specified)
  • Indicates impact beyond project (open-source downloads post-M24)

Document Control:

  • Version: 1.0-KPI-DASHBOARD
  • Date: 2025-11-06
  • Owner: VaultMesh Technologies B.V. (Coordinator)
  • Classification: Consortium Internal (will become Part B Section 2.1)
  • Related: PQC_Risk_Register.md, PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink