LensReading which lens this session carries.

Auditor evidence pack

Candidate at scope

Research & Development · Technology Scouting · line RD10C · Technical Diligence. This pack names every action taken on this unit, who or what took it, the authority that permitted it, and the model, prompt and policy versions in force at that moment.

Chain verified

Every record links to the one before it and hashes to its stored value. 1 record were re-hashed on this page load, in order, starting from the genesis value. Nothing was read from a cached verdict.

hash = sha256(prevHash + "|" + JSON{seq, unitRef, actor, action, outcome, occurredAt})

Records
1
Append-only, sequenced
Agent actions
1
Taken by software
Human actions
0
Taken by a named person
Refusals
0
Blocked by the authority register
Corrections
0
Later record supersedes an earlier one
Legal hold
None
Free to age out on schedule

The unit

What the work was, and where it sits

Reference
RD10C-1018
Subject
Idris Bianchi
Requested by
Marcus Kaplan
Value
$78k
Materiality
medium
Currently held by
Director, Technology Scouting (human)
Sub-function owner
Director, Technology Scouting
Orchestrator
Technology Scouting Orchestrator

Every action, in order

Actor, authority, versions in force, and the hash link to the record before it

1
Landscape Monitoring AgentobserveHeld

Holding at scope

2026-08-18 05:03:00ZAuthority RD10-AUTH-A1 · cap $250,000Jurisdiction DEAutonomy A3Retention TECH-3Y
Prompt
observe-scan@p11
Policy
segregation-of-duties@v4
Tools
read-only-lookup@t12
in fee36214...1a219bout 3dad474a...f4d461artifact ART-RD10C-1002-1 genesis b2b5565f...6b5852

Authority relied on

Who was allowed to do this, up to what value, in which jurisdictions

RD10-AUTH-A1ActiveTechnology Scouting Orchestrator

Any unit on a technology scouting line where every intake check passed, the policy in force is current, and the value sits inside the cap below.

Cap $250,000US · UK · DE · SG · AUDelegated from Director, Technology ScoutingExpires 2027-04-28

Versions in force

Exactly what was running when these actions were taken

KindIdentifierVersionStatusOwner
modelobserve-signal3.1currentSensing guild
policysegregation-of-dutiesv4currentInternal audit
promptobserve-scanp11currentSensing guild
toolsetread-only-lookupt12currentPlatform engineering

Gates on this line

The control points this unit had to clear

Leader review
Held for a named human when the unit exceeds the candidate decision envelope, when confidence falls below the floor, or when a policy clause is engaged.
Approver: Director, Technology Scouting · not reached

Records schedule and holds

How long this evidence must be kept, and whether it is frozen

TECH-3Y3 years
Technology change and access evidence
Security review and change audit requirement.
Deleted at three years from the change closing.

What this pack proves, and what it does not

Read this before you rely on it

It does prove
  • Every action carries a named actor, an actor kind, and a timestamp.
  • Every action names the authority grant that permitted it and the cap that grant carries.
  • Every action stamps the model, prompt, policy and tool versions in force at that moment.
  • Corrections are additive. A later record supersedes an earlier one and says why; the earlier record is never edited or deleted.
  • The chain is re-hashed live on this page, so a single altered field is detected immediately.
It does not prove
  • It is not tamper-proof against an attacker with write access to the store, who could rewrite the whole chain from genesis. Making that impossible requires publishing chain tips to a store this application cannot write to. That anchor is not built, and this page does not claim it.
  • The evidence in this demonstration is modeled from a simulated estate, not captured from production systems.
  • Identity here is the actor name recorded on the action. Cryptographic agent identity and signed attestation are a separate piece of work.