Epic needs a lockdown mode; too many portals is the point™

The patient's-eye critique of the record everyone keeps except you. A health-records system should have a lockdown mode; a way to draw the ring tight, access limited to just your family, the people you actually chose, and no one else without your say. And the sprawl is the vulnerability, not a convenience: too many portals is the point. Every provider spins up its own login; your record scatters across a dozen portals you can't see into at once; and each portal is another door, another breach surface, another place you can't tell who's looking. More doors is not more access for you; it's less control by you (kin to HIPAA-is-a-lie; your own chart, walled from you but strangely reachable by channels you never opened; and a phone is a witness).

Where federal code actually speaks to this (general framework; verify it yourself): HIPAA's Security Rule sets an access-control standard; a system holding electronic health information must limit access to only those granted rights (45 CFR §164.312(a), with information-access management under §164.308(a)(4)). The Privacy Rule adds the minimum-necessary standard; limit access and disclosure of your health information to the minimum needed (§164.502(b), §164.514(d)). So the principle in the code is exactly the argument: access should be controlled and minimized, not sprawled across every portal by default. A design with no patient-held lockdown and endless open doors runs against the spirit of that standard.