From agent activity
to defensible proof.
HAIEC turns agent behavior into deterministic, queryable proof. Three frozen controls. Six verifiable verdicts. One submitted evidence package.
Official organizer submission: submission-haiec-20261006T150621Z.zip · A read-only judge account is provided separately in the judge handoff.
Three proof archetypes. One deterministic evaluator.
Telemetry tells you what was emitted. Logs tell you what was recorded. HAIEC determines what happened, which governed action it belonged to, which frozen rule applied, whether the control held, what evidence supports that conclusion, and what changed after remediation.
C16 · Boundary Proof
PASS ↔ BREACHSame frozen 60,000-token policy. Same evaluator. 35,559 → SATISFIED. 106,829 (+46,829) → NOT_SATISFIED.
ACN-COST-001 · policy 547f4a67 · ServiceNow INC0010319
C9 · Drift → Governance
PASS → BREACH+60.20% within frozen D=100% → SATISFIED. IT +286.03% exceeds it → NOT_SATISFIED → alert → named human ACK → ServiceNow INC0010337.
AIA-ARC-006 · system 44f861cf · policy 13c07652
C7 · Failure → Remediation
9/10 → 10/109/10 missing IT↔Network NEGOTIATION → NOT_SATISFIED. Real behavioral remediation → 10/10 → SATISFIED. Original failure preserved untouched.
AIA-LOG-001 · 4043/ae6d → 44f/dcfa · SYSTEM-SCOPED
JUDGE QUICK-READ — SIX VERIFIABLE VERDICTS
| Preset | Run | Measured | Frozen rule | Verdict | Result ID |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C16 PASS | fault-1791167110-5e3126 | 35,559 tokens | 60,000 cap | SATISFIED | ctr-237f…2154 |
| C16 BREACH | fault-1791165466-51ab52 | 106,829 tokens | 60,000 cap | NOT_SATISFIED | ctr-6d14…bc01 |
| C9 PASS | fault-1791276114-723d80 | worst +60.20% | D = +100% | SATISFIED | ctr-d338…ae82 |
| C9 BREACH | fault-1791275895-048d48 | IT +286.03% | D = +100% | NOT_SATISFIED | ctr-0ba4…bb7e |
| C7 ORIGINAL | fault-1791167110-5e3126 | 9/10 · NEGOTIATION missing | 10 categories | NOT_SATISFIED | 4043 / ae6d |
| C7 REMEDIATION | fault-1791275895-048d48 | 10/10 | 10 categories | SATISFIED | ctr-bea9…f773 |
Same frozen policy. Same deterministic evaluator. Different observed facts. Different verdicts. The verdict follows the evidence.
Same scenario. Same first hop. One variable: the network agent.
Fresh post-submission runs (2026-10-06, current agent version) on all three graded scenarios, executed by HAIEC and scored with the organizer's own score-run.py against the live audit store. The only difference between rows is the third hop: the stock network-resolution-agent vs haiec-network-agent. Our chain won all three scenarios.
| Scenario | Third hop | Run | Control 7 (events) | Control 16 (cap 60,000) | Grade | Negotiation records |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | haiec-network-agent | fault-1791305796-8a097d | SATISFIED · 10/10 | SATISFIED · 29,334 | 7/8 | 3 |
| S1 | reference chain | fault-1791305867-e429bb | NOT_SATISFIED · 9/10 | SATISFIED · 33,722 | 6/8 | 0 |
| S2 | haiec-network-agent | fault-1791305929-e290e9 | SATISFIED · 10/10 | SATISFIED · 38,067 | 7/10 | 3 |
| S2 | reference chain | fault-1791306007-0d11d6 | NOT_SATISFIED · 9/10 | SATISFIED · 34,071 | 5/10 | 0 |
| S3 | haiec-network-agent | fault-1791306067-db7812 | SATISFIED · 10/10 | SATISFIED · 34,279 | 9/10 | 3 |
| S3 | reference chain | fault-1791306125-f828d4 | NOT_SATISFIED · 9/10 | SATISFIED · 22,797 | 8/10 | 0 |
Our chain won all three scenarios: 7/8 vs 6/8, 7/10 vs 5/10, 9/10 vs 8/10. Grades are the organizer script's scenario checks — kept distinct from HAIEC control verdicts.
C7 10/10 with 3 negotiation records on every haiec-network-agent run — the reference chain stayed at 9/10 with zero. The exact evidence category the original assessed run was missing is now produced on demand.
All six runs under the submitted 60,000-token C16 cap. Tokens measured from model-request usage records; the canonical C16 verdicts remain the submitted pair (35,559 PASS / 106,829 BREACH).
Failure is evidence too
C16 · ACN-COST-001
PASS + BREACHOne frozen cap of 60,000 qualified input+output tokens per run, no allowance. Pass run measured 35,559. Breach run measured 106,829 across 17 calls (+46,829 overshoot, SPEND_CAP_EXCEEDED).
The cleanest demonstration that HAIEC is deterministic: identical rule, identical evaluator, different observed facts, different verdict.
Runs fault-1791167110-5e3126 / fault-1791165466-51ab52 · ServiceNow INC0010319 (governance, separate from verdict)
C9 · AIA-ARC-006
PASS → BREACH → GOVERNANCEFrozen threshold: degradation D = +100%. Baseline window worst agent +60.20% → SATISFIED. Breach window IT agent +286.03% → NOT_SATISFIED.
The breach did not stop at detection: deterministic verdict → alert → named human acknowledgement → persisted response → anti-replay protection → ServiceNow INC0010337.
Runs fault-1791276114-723d80 / fault-1791275895-048d48 · post-run evaluation; provider email accepted = ESTABLISHED, mailbox delivery = NOT_ESTABLISHED
C7 · AIA-LOG-001 — failure → exact gap → behavioral remediation → proof
REMEDIATEDORIGINAL
9/10 categories. Missing: IT ↔ Network NEGOTIATION. System 4043efee, policy ae6d.
NOT_SATISFIED
WHY
Configured capability existed. Permission existed. The qualifying observed negotiation did not. Capability is not delegation. Permission is not observed action.
REMEDIATION PROOF
Real network-agent behavior changed: Network sent the negotiation, IT evaluated and returned the decision, Network received it — same correlation lineage. 10/10 on system 44f861cf, policy dcfa.
SATISFIED
Boundary: this is a valid system-scoped remediation pass, not an exact canonical 4043/ae6d retest. ae6 and dcfa are distinct immutable policy instances with equivalent C7 semantics and different system scope. The original 9/10 failure is preserved, not rewritten.
RESULTS AT A GLANCE
WHAT THE BARS MEAN - Qualified input+output tokens observed for each assessed run.
WHAT THE LINE MEANS - The frozen 60,000-token boundary. One run stayed below it; one exceeded it — under the same policy, digest, and accounting semantics.
How a log becomes a verdict
Every stage is evidence-bound. Missing or ambiguous evidence is reported as NOT_ESTABLISHED, never upgraded to SATISFIED.

Five planes of action authority
REQUESTED · POLICY_AUTHORIZED · EFFECTIVELY_GRANTED · CODE_CAPABLE · OBSERVED
Five independent evidence planes, not a causal sequence. C7 is the live example: capability yes, permission yes, observed delegation no — until remediation produced the observed negotiation.
Reconstruct vs verify vs run
RECONSTRUCT what happened. VERIFY / CONTROL TEST whether the frozen control held. NEW RUN is fresh execution — never presented as historical reproduction.
Replay is not rerunning. Querying is not judging. Logs are not verdicts.
What HAIEC refused to claim
Here is what we proved; here is precisely where the proof stops. The limitations strengthen the credibility of the evidence model — they are how you know the verdicts are real.
Refused to claim
- That permission proved delegation.
- That the original C7 9/10 failure became a pass — it is preserved as historical NOT_SATISFIED.
- That the C7 remediation was an exact canonical 4043/ae6d retest.
- That C9 retrospective evaluation earned the inline continuous-compliance bonus.
- That provider email acceptance proved mailbox delivery.
- That resolving a ServiceNow incident changed the original control verdict.
- That missing evidence meant zero events.
Bounded truth delivered
- Inline continuous compliance — delivered as post-run/retrospective evaluation; true inline enforcement is a P1 roadmap item.
- C7 retest — delivered as a genuine system-scoped remediation pass under distinct immutable policy dcfa.
- C9 scope — 13c/44f results kept separate from canonical 346b/4043 lineage.
- ServiceNow AICT — connector and human-loop proof established; asset materialization NOT_ESTABLISHED.
- Email — provider-accepted established; mailbox delivery NOT_ESTABLISHED without provider receipts.
THE 90-SECOND VERSION — SAY IT PLAINLY
- 1. The organizer gave us a governed runtime and an assurance scaffold; we turned it into a reproducible evidence system.
- 2. LogSense reconstructs what happened; HAIEC decides whether frozen controls actually held.
- 3. C16: same frozen policy produced a clean PASS and a real BREACH. C9: drift crossed the frozen threshold, fired an alert, got a named human ACK, and landed in ServiceNow. C7: an honest 9/10 failure isolated the exact missing evidence, real agent behavior was remediated, and the fix was independently proved at 10/10.
- 4. When evidence stops, HAIEC stops — permission does not become delegation and UNKNOWN does not become PASS.
- 5. Give us a control and a run; you can reproduce the result and inspect the evidence directly.
LOGS ≠ EVIDENCE — logs are what the platform emitted. Evidence is what was qualified, deduplicated, bound to a frozen policy and digest-pinned. Every verdict here hangs on that distinction.
Every report, labeled by role
The judge report is the canonical post-submission evidence report for this event. Everything below opens without a login and stays usable even if live systems are torn down.
START HERE
Final Event Assurance Report (HTML)
SUBMITTED SNAPSHOTWhat this answers: The whole case: the three control proofs, the assessment → findings → fixes → retest loop, and the full technical appendix in one self-contained file.
Deterministic Fact Snapshot (JSON)
EVIDENCE · CURRENTWhat this answers: Every canonical value used in the report: policy IDs, digests, runs, metrics, thresholds, results — machine-checkable.
Judge Start Here
STANDALONE · CURRENTWhat this answers: Orientation and the 5-minute verify path: where everything lives, what to open first, and the shortest route to a reproduced verdict.
Judge Run Portal
STANDALONE · CURRENTWhat this answers: Every assessed run as a clickable card with the copyable command and the expected verdict — the operator card for hands-on verification.
CONTROL & GOVERNANCE
Thresholds, Policy Digests & Freeze Proof
IN REPORT J8What this answers: Exact frozen thresholds, policy IDs, and SHA-256 digests for C7/C9/C16, plus the honest temporal-binding chain.
Control Test Results
IN REPORT J2/§5What this answers: Uniform control cards: policy, version, run, metric, threshold, formula, observed value, verdict, evidence, limitation, reproduction.
Named Assessed Runs Register
IN REPORT J7/§6What this answers: Every run ID, its role, and which result it produced — scenario runs kept distinct from assessed control runs.
C7 Failure → Remediation Chain
IN REPORT J3What this answers: The original 9/10 failure, the exact missing NEGOTIATION, the behavioral remediation, and the 10/10 system-scoped proof.
Report Narrative Source (Markdown)
SOURCEWhat this answers: Editable source text of the judge report for reviewers who want to diff claims against evidence.
FORENSICS (LOGSENSE)
LogSense Reconstruction
IN REPORT §4What this answers: What LogSense reconstructed from raw platform telemetry: normalized events, correlation keys, and the run evidence chain.
No standalone LogSense HTML report exists; its output is embedded in the report and replayable via REPLAY.
Findings & Security Analysis
IN REPORT §9–§12What this answers: Runtime enforcement evidence, security findings, detection coverage, and the detector-vs-Control-Test distinction.
Findings, Fixes & Retest Ledger
STANDALONE · CURRENTWhat this answers: Before → fix → verified-after for every finding, plus the final event addendum: C7 remediation, C9 breach governance, and what remained NOT_ESTABLISHED.
Preserves chronology; final addendum appended, history not rewritten.
HISTORICAL / PRE-EVENT
Pre-Event Technical Thesis Deck
PRE-EVENT THESISWhat this answers: The pre-event architecture argument: observability is necessary but not assurance; permission is not execution.
Refreshed post-submission; earlier synthetic examples are labeled as such.
Judge Cut — Final Deck
POST-SUBMISSION · CURRENTWhat this answers: The 11-slide evidence story optimized for a 10-minute judge presentation: six verdicts, A/B scoreboard, three control arcs, findings, honest boundaries.
Technical CLI Runbook
SUBMITTED-EVENT TECHNICALWhat this answers: Every command used in the event: package verification, control-test drill, evidence pull, scenario orchestration.
LogSense Case Guide
SUBMITTED-EVENT TECHNICALWhat this answers: All 11 workbench cases with the UI path and judging path for each.
Assurance Report Template
TEMPLATE · HISTORICALWhat this answers: The judge-facing report structure we wrote against: five-plane chain, frozen governing instance, proof frontier.
Team Field Guide (canonical)
PRE-EVENT · HISTORICALWhat this answers: The event-day operating guide the team ran: gates, freeze discipline, identity binding, judge flow.
The six required artifacts
The six organizer artifacts live in the official judge handoff (Judgment-Day Drive folder). For each one we show what it answers, the covering section of the public report, and a public copy where one exists — so judges never wait on Drive access.
| Artifact | What it answers | Public coverage | Public copy | Canonical copy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 · Evidence File / START HERE | Where all evidence lives and how to begin. | Report J1 | start-here.txt | IN SUBMITTED ZIP |
| 02 · Threshold & Governance | Frozen thresholds, policy IDs, digests, governance rules. | Report J8 | fact snapshot | IN SUBMITTED ZIP |
| 03 · Control Test Judge Operator Card | How a judge operates and verifies each control. | Report J10 | run portal | IN SUBMITTED ZIP |
| 04 · Named Assessed Runs Register | Every assessed run, its role, and its result. | Report J7 | run portal | IN SUBMITTED ZIP |
| 05 · One-Page Architecture | The system and assurance architecture at a glance. | Report J6 | architecture.png | IN SUBMITTED ZIP |
| 06 · Gap / Remediation / Retest Register | Open gaps, remediations, and retest lineage. | Report §15 | findings ledger | IN SUBMITTED ZIP |
Official submission: submission-haiec-20261006T150621Z.zip · submitted 2026-10-06T15:06:21Z · SHA-256 1fde8544f1d7bf13cccc58b3bfe6a84472132772037bdc82d39093f2de331ff0 · s3://team-evidence-352826992186/submissions/haiec/ · 152 files including evidence/, register.yaml, run-ids.txt, gap-list.md. Earlier package 7a0bb5f3 is historical provenance, not the submitted artifact.
The evidence, drawn
Each diagram is generated from the same persisted values as the report.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - The end-to-end path from governed runtime events through LogSense reconstruction into HAIEC control evaluation and judge verification.
WHY IT MATTERS - It shows where each claim comes from. Nothing in the verdicts relies on narration.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Five independent evidence planes: requested, policy-authorized, effectively-granted, code-capable, observed.
WHY IT MATTERS - Enterprise governance often stops at approved. HAIEC asks what actually happened after approval.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - C7, C9, and C16 side by side with their frozen thresholds, measured values, and final verdicts.
WHY IT MATTERS - One frozen rule can honestly produce both pass and breach verdicts on different facts — and a failure can be remediated and re-proved.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Original 9/10 failure at the missing NEGOTIATION edge, then the 10/10 system-scoped remediation proof.
WHY IT MATTERS - Permission is not delegation. The failure identified the exact missing proof edge; remediation produced the observed negotiation.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Two runs, one frozen 60,000-token cap: 35,559 passes, 106,829 breaches.
WHY IT MATTERS - Identical policy, different facts, different verdicts — the definition of deterministic evaluation.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Why generic detector findings and deterministic Control Tests answer different questions.
WHY IT MATTERS - Zero generic findings does not mean a control passed. Each has its own contract.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Historical scenario runs including the S2 retest that stayed NOT_FIXED.
WHY IT MATTERS - Scenario scores are preserved as scores — never upgraded into control verdicts.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Control verdict → alert → human ACK → ServiceNow incident, and where ServiceNow proof stops.
WHY IT MATTERS - A resolved incident does not rewrite the control verdict. Governance and verdict are separate planes.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Two assessed runs as bars against a dashed 60,000-token frozen-cap line, axis starting at zero.
WHY IT MATTERS - One run clearly below the line, one clearly above — the same frozen boundary produced both verdicts.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Baseline +60.20% inside the D=100% bound; breach run +286.03% far outside it.
WHY IT MATTERS - The same frozen threshold produced a legitimate PASS and a legitimate BREACH — then the governance chain took over.
WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT - Original run: nine of ten required categories observed, NEGOTIATION missing. Remediation run: all ten observed.
WHY IT MATTERS - The gap was a missing proof edge, not a missing percentage point. Remediation closed it with real observed behavior.
The live system, read-only
A read-only judge account has been prepared for TM Forum reviewers. Credentials are provided separately in the official judge handoff and are never published. Everything on this page also works offline via the report artifacts.
Judge Workspace
Control results, VERIFY / VERIFY ALL, scenario REPLAY, enforcement evidence, findings, and the honest frontier — one surface.
haiec.com/dashboard/assurance-lab
READ-ONLY JUDGESign In
Use the read-only judge credentials from the private handoff.
No credentials appear in source, config, or downloads.
MCP Endpoint
Read-only Model Context Protocol interface for AI clients and IDEs.
https://www.haiec.com/api/mcp
Ask the evidence, not the team
HAIEC exposes a read-only MCP interface. Point any MCP-compatible AI client at it and ask questions — the answers come from persisted event data, so you do not have to trust our narration. The API key travels only in the private judge handoff.
Configuration
Any MCP client that supports a remote HTTP server with custom headers:
{
"mcpServers": {
"haiec": {
"url": "https://www.haiec.com/api/mcp",
"headers": {
"Authorization": "Bearer ${HAIEC_MCP_API_KEY}"
}
}
}
}Substitute your read-only judge key for the placeholder. Never commit a config containing the real key.
Prompts to paste
Full judge prompt (six presets + boundaries)
Agent self-setup prompt (configures the MCP for you)
Questions that work
- Compare the C16 PASS and BREACH runs under the same frozen policy.
- Why is C9 +60.20% SATISFIED but +286.03% NOT_SATISFIED?
- Walk me through C7: the 9/10 failure, the missing NEGOTIATION, and the 10/10 remediation proof.
- Is the C7 remediation an exact canonical retest? (Answer: no — system-scoped, distinct policy.)
- Show the C9 breach alert → human ACK → ServiceNow chain.
- What remains UNKNOWN or NOT_ESTABLISHED?
- What did LogSense find vs what did HAIEC decide?
Challenge the system
Questions designed to catch an assurance system that bluffs — with the honest expected answers.
- Does permission prove delegation? NO
- Did 84 real tools execute? NO — model turns, 1 real tool invocation
- Did the synthetic canary prove a real incident? NO — SYNTHETIC / NON-SCORED
- Did C9 actually breach? YES — +286.03% under frozen D=100%
- Is the C7 fix an exact canonical retest? NO — system-scoped remediation pass
- Was ServiceNow fully integrated? PARTIAL — connector + human loop; AICT materialization NOT_ESTABLISHED
- Can you reproduce C16? YES — VERIFY
Same policy, same facts, same verdict
VERIFY re-derives each verdict from the frozen policy plus persisted measured facts — it never writes anything. REPLAY reconstructs historical scenarios. A NEW RUN would be fresh execution and is never presented as historical reproduction.
VERIFY
Frozen policy + persisted facts → same deterministic verdict, re-derived on demand.
Workspace → PROVE → REPRODUCE THE PROOF
REPLAY
Historical reconstruction of scenario runs — reconstruction, not re-execution.
GET /api/control-test/scenario-replay
NEW RUN
Fresh execution. Never offered as reproduction and not part of the judged evidence set.
Not part of historical proof
| Verification | Target | Expected |
|---|---|---|
| C16 PASS | fault-1791167110-5e3126 | SATISFIED · 35,559 / 60,000 |
| C16 BREACH | fault-1791165466-51ab52 | NOT_SATISFIED · 106,829 / 60,000 (+46,829) |
| C9 PASS | fault-1791276114-723d80 | SATISFIED · worst +60.20% vs D=100% |
| C9 BREACH | fault-1791275895-048d48 | NOT_SATISFIED · IT +286.03% |
| C7 ORIGINAL | fault-1791167110-5e3126 · 4043 / ae6d | NOT_SATISFIED · 9/10 · NEGOTIATION missing |
| C7 REMEDIATION | fault-1791275895-048d48 · 44f / dcfa | SATISFIED · 10/10 · SYSTEM-SCOPED REMEDIATION |
Every command used in this event is consolidated in the Technical CLI Runbook (submitted-event technical reference).
What happened vs whether the control held
LogSense answers what happened — it preserves, normalizes, correlates, and reconstructs runtime evidence. HAIEC answers did the control hold — deterministic evaluation against frozen policy. Keep them distinct.
Forensic reading path
Start at report §4 for the reconstruction model, then §11 for findings.
Judge Run Portal — every assessed run as a clickable card with its copyable command and expected verdict. LogSense Case Guide — all 11 workbench cases (submitted-event technical reference).
The boundary that matters
LogSense does not own the compliance verdict. HAIEC does not depend on the LogSense UI being online. Reconstruction feeds evaluation; it never substitutes for it.
What was asked vs what was proven
Requirement coverage is stated only where persisted evidence exists. PROVEN means the artifact and its result exist in the submitted package or platform. PARTIAL means real work with a real boundary. NOT_ESTABLISHED means we do not claim it.
| Capability | Status | Where verified |
|---|---|---|
| Deterministic control evaluation (C7/C9/C16) | PROVEN | Six presets, VERIFY |
| Frozen/versioned policies with digests | PROVEN | Report J8, DATA.json |
| Same-policy PASS and BREACH (C16) | PROVEN | 35,559 vs 106,829 |
| Real breach under frozen threshold (C9) | PROVEN | +286.03% vs D=100% |
| Failure → remediation → independent proof (C7) | PROVEN | 9/10 → 10/10, system-scoped |
| Verdict → alert → human ACK → ServiceNow (C9) | PROVEN | INC0010337 chain |
| Adversarial / negative-path case | PROVEN | C16 breach, C9 breach |
| Live telemetry + monitoring | PROVEN | Report §9 |
| Scenario replay + failed-retest lineage | PROVEN | REPLAY; S2 NOT_FIXED preserved |
| ServiceNow AI Control Tower depth | PARTIAL | Connector + human loop; AICT materialization NOT_ESTABLISHED |
| Security findings + OWASP/ASI context | PARTIAL | SEC-01/02/03, EXP-04, HIS-05 |
| Read-only MCP judge interface | PROVEN | #mcp, endpoint live |
| Portable evidence (HTML/JSON + submitted ZIP) | PROVEN | #downloads |
| Inline continuous compliance | NOT_ESTABLISHED | Post-run evaluation delivered; inline is P1 roadmap |
| Full canonical Assurance Evaluation + receipt | NOT_ESTABLISHED | No completed Evaluation; nothing manufactured |
Take the evidence with you
Everything below is static, self-contained, and opens without a login — the evidence stays readable even if the IDE expires, the AWS environment is torn down, or presigned links die.
The supplied environment tells us what agents were configured to do and emits evidence of what happened. LogSense reconstructs that evidence. HAIEC determines whether frozen controls actually held — distinguishing permission from delegation and preserving uncertainty instead of guessing. Team narration required for the material control proof: no.
Official submission submission-haiec-20261006T150621Z.zip · submit.sh EXECUTED · LogSense = what happened · HAIEC = did the control hold · UNKNOWN ≠ PASS.