Evidence Model

What each record
can establish.

Infraveil's architecture defines expected behavior. Source, configuration, signatures, receipts, and runtime observations answer different questions; none should be treated as a substitute for all the others.

On this page
Evidence status

This chapter describes evidence semantics, not a successful test result.

The current whitepaper can document the control contract and the records the runtime is designed to produce. It does not publish a completed Validation Protocol run that demonstrates request-bearing reliability, recovery, or enforcement outcomes.

A claim about observed behavior should cite a dated run bundle for an identified product build and environment. Without that bundle, the claim remains architectural, contractual, or unverified.

01 / Source contract

Source can show a mechanism and its intended invariants.

What it can support

Which checks exist, what inputs they bind, which failures are handled, where state is stored, and which actions are bounded in the inspected revision.

What it cannot support alone

That the inspected code is the deployed code, that a path executed, that dependencies behaved as expected, or that an outcome met its target.

Customers can inspect components installed on their hosts. Public runtime snapshot parity with the current deployable launcher and agent is not established and must not be inferred from similar filenames or documentation.

02 / Evidence chain

Follow the claim from intent to outcome.

LayerRepresentative recordQuestion answeredDoes not establish
IntentDesired-state revision or bounded commandWhat the hosted plane requested, for which target, and whenApproval, delivery, or execution
Artifact identityExact package hash and vendor release signatureWhich bytes were selected and whether expected release metadata signed themCustomer approval or runtime outcome
Customer approvalCustomer signature over the exact release hashWhether the configured customer key approved that hashThat a human reviewed it under auto mode, or that it executed
Transfer integrityDigest of bytes obtained on the customer hostWhether received bytes match the expected digestProcess start or service health
ExecutionLocal acknowledgement, process identity, start or exit eventWhether the identified runtime attempted or entered executionHealthy, reachable, or current state
OutcomeHealth checks, route probes, request records, service metricsWhat the configured observers saw for the recorded intervalUnobserved paths or future behavior
RecoveryFault timeline, restart or rollback receipt, restored probesWhat happened after a specific recorded failureRecovery from other failures or incompatible data changes
03 / Receipt semantics

Status names need explicit evidence.

Queued

The hosted service recorded intent. The target may not have received it.

Acknowledged

A target reported receipt. It does not mean the action completed.

Completed

The executing component reported its terminal action state. Inspect correlated outcome evidence.

Failed

A defined step stopped with an error. The system may still be partially running.

Revoked

Hosted authority was withdrawn. An offline target can apply that change only after receiving it.

Reverted

A prior state was requested or restored. Data and dependency compatibility require separate validation.

04 / Correlation requirements

A useful bundle preserves identity across systems.

  • Target: workspace, host, agent, service, and route identifiers.
  • Revision: management-plane build, launcher and agent versions, infraveil.json revision, package hash, and policy revision.
  • Time: issued, received, started, completed, observed, and recovered timestamps with clock assumptions.
  • Causality: command or rollout identity propagated into runtime events, receipts, health, gateway records, and rollback activity.
  • Gaps: dropped events, queue pressure, stale state, missing probes, sampling, retention, and offline intervals.
05 / Independent validation

Reproduce the claim at the customer boundary.

  1. 1. Inspect the delivered runtime.

    Record the exact customer-side components and hashes rather than relying on a source snapshot.

  2. 2. Exercise the selected approval mode.

    Show the behavior for an approved hash, an unapproved hash, and a changed package.

  3. 3. Observe disk and network boundaries.

    Record custody-mode persistence, outbound calls, managed routes, and any route that bypasses the gateway.

  4. 4. Inject failures.

    Test coordination loss, process failure, disk pressure, bad health, and recovery stop conditions.

Use the Validation Protocol to define and publish a dated execution record. Until such a record exists, describe runtime outcomes as unverified rather than proven.