This sample shows how selected signed records are assembled by hand, with context, for one review. It isn’t output from an export feature Glacis offers today.
What a record does and doesn’t establish is set out beside the one below.
A signed record from one supervised AI action. A valid signature confirms the record is intact and shows which key signed it, and the record reads back what the control reported. It doesn’t tell you whether the note was clinically correct, whether every encounter was captured, or whether the system is safe or compliant, and it can’t confirm that events happened the way, or at the time, the record says.
OVERT 1.1.0 · signed with Ed25519 · countersigned by a Glacis service-operated witness
{
"receipt_version": "2.0",
"overt_version": "1.1.0",
"id": "glc_receipt_019765f0-3a1c-7d42-9e08-c2b4d6a8f135",
"timestamp": "2026-06-11T09:14:02.317Z",
"methodology_version": "1.0.0",
"demonstration_note": "Demonstration workflow data. The cryptography is real: every signature and hash in this receipt verifies in your browser.",
"subject": {
"organization_id": "org_example_health",
"deployment_id": "dep_clinical_scribe_prod",
"workflow": "ambient-scribe-draft-note",
"model": "claude-sonnet-4-6",
"provider": "anthropic"
},
"evidence": {
"input_hash": "31ee69bf5bd68b21a89872cbd319f4d71860c23d31da5aa75b39cf77ae248981",
"output_hash": "157cf56f011961904304e359a0f9779152de75d97eaf540f4cd4c8e6beb3a161"
},
"signals": {
"binary_hash": "8445ef214d71984f41f6fad9199b2dc41d036804df5fe75bbc1e94e0fb32913f",
"network_state_hash": "02d0770849f806acc045ab5ce99c81938c3ca276c779bed0f2977416f4a5be42",
"epoch_token": "1781082842317",
"context_window_hash": "ed1f4f976b6013e321979922351ee454c6dfb077019981b6bb022acbfdbe9d7e",
"composite_hash": "64a74d744d8af6fe0805a438556209eeaa3b62c31810f52a538f4ccc98ee2626"
},
"controls": {
"guardrail_action": "allow",
"nonconformity_score": 0,
"rules_evaluated": 14,
"rules_triggered": 0,
"policy_mode": "enforce",
"phi_egress_check": "pass"
},
"attestation": {
"operator_signature": "10caced1f9ca157495eacdc5fd018ab0369c20e543c10c0403e9a80532531931b6e58c450555327eecef7f8dc683300c0d6dafd115a103efbe0932fef4f3150b",
"operator_public_key": "9c8eb1b83a59662ff76b84075dcb7f8c6b391e2e018666675211d93fc94723d8",
"witness_signature": "999464e4c04c22744519cd01e3f7b14cb876954d8765bcc2c579c20aad0acee4d8a29d97316c689ac026419c3379bd9021f5b40317dfbb770302486998354901",
"witness_public_key": "7c038b40b8c6183c749c92079709a32e19b0d4572befcc23e0a348e7e4df39a5",
"previous_receipt_hash": "genesis",
"chain_position": 1
}
}
Verify this record yourself. The workflow data is a demonstration; the cryptography is real, and the checks run in your browser.
Verify a recordEach part of the record answers one question a reviewer will ask.
“What did the control decide?” The policy mode, the guardrail outcome and the rules the record says were evaluated. In this sample: enforce, allow, 14 rules and none triggered.
“Which checks ran?” Rules evaluated and triggered, the PHI egress check result and a nonconformity score, for the one event this record covers.
“Which AI handled this?” The model, provider and configuration identifiers as reported at event time.
“Can anyone tamper with this?” The record is signed with Ed25519 and its contents are hashed, so a later change is detectable. This portal example also carries a countersignature and inclusion proof from a witness Glacis operates.
“What left your environment?” Hashed commitments, outcomes, signatures and metadata. No prompts, no responses and no PHI.
“What time was reported?” The timestamp and epoch token bound into the signed record, at the precision the record states.
Selected records are assembled by hand into a scoped review packet. Which fields a reviewer needs, and whether they accept the packet, is theirs to decide.
Which workflows and controls were in scope for the period, how many in-scope decisions were recorded, and what was excluded, stated so a reviewer can reproduce the count.
Which controls ran on the in-scope events, with pass and fail counts. Evidence of the events the pack records, rather than a policy document saying the controls exist.
How records map to ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF and EU AI Act controls. One evidence base for several frameworks. The mapping is for the reviewer’s reference and isn’t a certification claim.
The records in the packet, organized by date, system, reported outcome or control identifier.
A mapping reference for a scoped review. It isn’t a live OSCAL export or an automatic feed into a GRC platform.
Your team keeps the protected context. Reviewers receive a scoped record with what they need to check the control event.
These records are structured and queryable. Where they’re stored, and which fields are kept, depends on the deployment configuration.
Tell us where your AI already acts, and we’ll walk through how a packet like this one would be assembled by hand for that workflow.
Talk to us