The authorisation layer for AI decisions

AIdecisionsshouldnotvanishintothinair.

The decision doesn’t go out until it’s policy-checked and sealed.

In the path · not a log written afterwards

Take the seat · 2 min

The film explains it. The seat lets you approve a decision, lose the evidence, and then try to break the record yourself.

02The position

We’re the authorisation layer for AI decisions.

Regulated companies can’t ship AI into decisions that matter, because they can’t prove afterwards what happened.

We sit in the path: the decision doesn’t go out until it’s policy-checked and sealed.

01

Proposed

A model produces a decision. Nothing has been delivered yet.

02

Policy-checkedGate

Evaluated against the controls in force at this moment.

03

Sealed

Output, policy, model state and approvals bound into one record.

04

Released

The decision goes out, already provable.

Fails the checkThe decision is held rather than delivered, and the refusal is itself sealed as a record, with the control that stopped it named.

Stripe for consequential AI decisions.

03The divergence

Every decision writes two records.

One is a log line with a retention window. One is sealed evidence. Below, eighteen months happen to both.

  1. Day 0 · IssueT+0

    A decision ships.

    An AI-assisted decision goes out the door. From this moment two accounts of it exist: one written to application logs, one sealed as evidence at the instant of issue.

    Unsealedwritten to logs · retention 30 days
    Sealedsealed on issue · digest committed
  2. Day 30 · Rotation+30 d

    The logs begin to forget.

    Retention windows close and the raw output rotates away. Nothing has gone wrong: this is infrastructure working as designed. The unsealed account is already thinning.

    Unsealedraw output rotated out
    Sealeddigest re-verifies · unchanged
  3. Day 120 · Drift+120 d

    The system moves on.

    The model that made the decision is retired. Prompts are rewritten, tools are swapped. The exact configuration that produced the output no longer exists anywhere in production.

    Unsealedmodel retired · prompts revised
    Sealedmodel state pinned inside the record
  4. Day 365 · Turnover+1 y

    The people move on.

    The approving officer has left the company. The rationale survives only as memory in other people's heads. And memory is not a record.

    Unsealedapprover departed · rationale is hearsay
    Sealedapprovals still named and attributable
  5. Day 540 · Inquiry+18 m

    Produce the record.

    A regulator asks precisely what was decided, under which policy revision, on what evidence, with whose approval. The demand is identical for both timelines. What differs is what remains.

    Unsealedpolicy revised ×3 since decision
    Sealedpolicy revision 18 · bound at issue
  6. Day 547 · Response+18 m

    Reconstruction versus retrieval.

    One team greps cold archives and interviews former staff toward a best-effort narrative. The other exports the sealed record. One process takes weeks; the other, seconds.

    Unsealedfragments recovered · 2 of 14 lines
    Sealedevidence pack exported · 4 s
  7. Verdict

    One is a story. One is evidence.

    An account that cannot be verified is an account, not evidence. The sealed record is admissible on its own terms: tamper-evident, complete, and verifiable without Sigilith present.

    Unsealedno admissible record
    Sealedadmissible · verifiable · sealed
04The exhibit

Everything above is what the void looks like. This is what comes out of it.

Exhibit A · Certified ExtractSIG-2026-0417-A

What a sealed decision
looks like on paper.

An evidence-grade record is not a log line. It is the exact output as delivered, bound to the policy that authorised it, the approvals that cleared it, and the context that produced it, all sealed at the moment of the decision and verifiable long after.

Subject
Adverse action · application #48812
Digest
computing…
SealedSIG
Provenance Manifest
Output
verbatim · as delivered
Policy
CRD-4.2 · revision 18
Model
pinned · frozen at decision time
Approvers
2 of 2 · named officers
Context
6 retrieved · 2 tools invoked
Sealed
2026-04-17T09:41:22Z
Sealed · tamper-evident
Verifiable without Sigilith present.
05The environments

Built for regulated environments

Operational Context

Automated decisions in Banking

Customer communications (advice, disclosures)
Credit decisions & adverse action rationales
KYC/AML summaries & escalations
Complaint handling responses
Provenance
SIG-BAN
EXACT OUTPUTApproved + delivered content
POLICY CONTROLSActive guardrails + evals
SYSTEM CONTEXTSources + tools used
Sealcomputing…
Ready
06The standard

Not technical telemetry.Institutional evidence.

Standard audit logs are insufficient for regulatory and board-level review. Three grades of record exist; only one survives examination.

I

Standard telemetry

Audit logs & traces

Ephemeral engineering logs built for debugging and access tracking. They rotate, they mutate, and they were never designed to be shown to a regulator.

Insufficient for audit
II

LLM observability

Engineering traces

Detailed traces of how a prompt was processed. Invaluable to engineers, but they carry no evidentiary weight, bind to no policy, and can be rewritten.

Engineering focus
III

Evidence infrastructure

Sigilith record

Cryptographically sealed provenance binding the output to the policy and system state that produced it. Built to be examined by someone hostile.

Institutional grade

Sigilith is built for teams where “show your work” is a legal requirement.

07The instruments

Built for high-trust operational environments.

Specialised systems for institutions that need control, defensibility, and operational clarity in high-stakes workflows.

Core_Platform

Sigilith Platform

The authorisation layer for consequential AI decisions. Policy-checked in the path, sealed at issue, and verifiable afterwards for compliance, dispute response, and model risk review.

Explore the platform
Liveness_VerificationNew

Sigilith Sentry

Advanced eKYC and fraud decisioning

Establish live presence in one capture with an active light challenge, weigh fraud signals jointly, and escalate ambiguity to named officers, with every verdict sealed as evidence.

Explore Sigilith Sentry
08The applications

Evidence workflows for high-stakes AI

INTERACTIONS

Regulated Communications

Prove what was said or decided, under what policy, and with whose approval.

Institutional deployment
RECONSTRUCTION

Audits & Investigations

Reconstruct what happened with verifiable records and policy state.

Institutional deployment
GOVERNANCE

Third-Party AI Governance

Hold vendors to the same evidentiary standard with verifiable records.

Institutional deployment
Encryption in transit + at rest
Access controls + auditability
Designed for compliance workflows
Secure protocol

Get access

If AI outputs create risk in your organisation, you need evidence. Request a technical briefing on institutional provenance.

Chain of custody · 08/08 · sealing…
Sigilith

Evidence infrastructure for consequential AI decisions: records built to outlive the systems that made them.

Est. in the decision path

{ CORRESPONDENCE }

syed@sigilith.com

Vendor-risk questionnaires and security reviews are welcome with a first message.

LinkedIn

© 2026 Sigilith, Inc. · A Delaware corporation. All rights reserved.

Set in Instrument Serif · Inter · IBM Plex Mono