Every regulated AI deployment hits the same wall. The compliance review asks: prove the agent handled our data according to policy.
The answer comes back as a PDF. Policy documents, SOC reports, vendor self-attestation, application logs the operator can rewrite. None of it proves what happened during execution. None of it is verifiable without trusting the people who produced it. So a review that should take days takes months.
Auditors are really asking three questions. What actually ran, the exact model, code, and policy loaded into memory at the moment the data was processed. What it actually did, which tools, with what parameters, against what data class. And what rules were actually in force, the policy hash bound to the workload at execution, not the one in the binder.
TRACE answers all three in a single signed, hardware-attested record that anyone can verify offline. It is not a new stack. It is a profile that binds primitives the industry already trusts: IETF RATS and EAT, SCITT transparency logs, SLSA provenance, SPIFFE identity. The signing key never leaves the enclave, so even a root-level operator cannot forge a record for a run that violated policy.
The EU AI Act's tamper-evident logging requirement lands around the end of 2027. The audit infrastructure you choose in the next twelve months decides whether that deadline is a paperwork exercise or a real posture. Full breakdown in my newsletter, Proof, Not Promises.
What evidence are you collecting for your agents today, and would it survive an auditor who does not trust your logs?
Top comments (0)