Chapter 27 — Core Conformance and Certification Framework

Part I — Conformance Foundations and Architecture

The Core Conformance and Certification Framework, abbreviated CCCF, is the constitutional architecture through which ZAYAZ determines, records, explains, assures and, where governed, certifies whether a defined subject conforms to an exact set of constitutional, semantic, structural, behavioural, operational, security, tenant-isolation, Publication, evidence and historical-trust requirements.

The CCCF governs conformance assessment for subjects including:

Constitutional Baselines;
constitutional documents;
Core Constitutional Objects;
Core schemas;
Core Registries;
Core Relationship Types;
Core policies;
Core methodologies;
Core workflows;
Runtime Bundles;
Runtime Manifests;
Modules;
Components;
Extensions;
Extension Packages;
Extension Sets;
white-label deployments;
tenants;
organisations;
data domains;
graph domains;
Publications;
public verification services;
assurance systems;
certification schemes;
conformance-assessment processes.

The CCCF SHALL ensure that every conformance claim is bound to:

an identifiable subject;
an exact subject version or state;
an exact Constitutional Baseline;
an exact conformance profile;
explicit applicability;
explicit criteria;
explicit evidence;
an identifiable assessment method;
an identifiable assessor or validating Component;
a defined assessment period;
a defined confidence and limitation model;
an explicit outcome;
a defined validity period where applicable;
complete provenance.

The CCCF SHALL distinguish:

Concept	Constitutional Meaning
Validation	Objective evaluation of a subject or artefact against defined rules
Conformance Assessment	Governed determination of whether an identified subject satisfies applicable criteria
Assurance	Independent or otherwise governed conclusion over defined subject matter and criteria
Certification	Formal status granted under an approved Certification Scheme
Accreditation	Recognition that an assessment or certification body is competent and authorised under a defined Accreditation Scheme
Approval	Authorised decision permitting a defined action or state
Runtime Admission	Decision that a Runtime artefact or Package may enter a defined execution scope
Publication Eligibility	Decision that a Publication Object or Package may proceed under the CPF
Audit	Systematic examination against stated criteria
Attestation	Signed statement by an identified party concerning specified subject matter
Self-Declaration	Conformance statement issued by the assessed party
Verification	Confirmation of specified information, evidence or claims
Licence	Permission to use, operate or distribute under defined conditions

These concepts SHALL NOT be collapsed.

The governing principles are:

Conformance SHALL be assessed against an exact, applicable and versioned requirement set.

A technically passing test SHALL not establish constitutional conformance where applicability, authority, evidence, tenant isolation, historical state or required human judgement is incomplete.

HECATE may validate objective criteria and enforce Gates. HECATE SHALL not create certification authority, accreditation authority, assurance independence or constitutional truth.

Certification SHALL be scheme-bound, scope-bound, time-bound and evidence-bound. It SHALL not imply universal compliance, universal legal validity, absence of all defects or future conformance.

A conformance outcome SHALL remain distinct from an approval, assurance conclusion, certification decision, Runtime Admission decision and Publication decision.

Unknown, Indeterminate and Not Evaluated SHALL never be silently represented as Conformant.

Exceptions, deviations, compensating controls, accepted risks and transitional states SHALL remain explicit and SHALL not be concealed inside a binary pass result.

Every conformance result SHALL preserve both Module lineage and Component lineage, together with tenant, white-label, Baseline, Extension, Runtime, Publication and temporal lineage.

Derived intelligence, including Pergamum Pulse outputs and AI-generated findings, SHALL remain non-authoritative until governed review and activation.

Conceptually:

Authoritative Constitutional Baseline
        │
        ├── Constitutional Requirements
        ├── Core Requirements
        ├── Runtime Requirements
        ├── Extension Requirements
        ├── Publication Requirements
        ├── Security Requirements
        ├── Tenant-Isolation Requirements
        ├── Evidence Requirements
        └── Historical-Trust Requirements
        │
        ▼
Conformance Requirement Model
        │
        ├── Requirement
        ├── Control Objective
        ├── Control
        ├── Criterion
        ├── Test
        ├── Evidence Requirement
        └── Outcome Rule
        │
        ▼
Conformance Profile
        │
        ├── Subject Class
        ├── Baseline
        ├── Jurisdiction
        ├── Framework
        ├── Tenant or White-Label Scope
        ├── Module and Component Scope
        ├── Assurance Level
        └── Certification Scheme
        │
        ▼
Assessment Plan
        │
        ├── Applicability Resolution
        ├── Evidence Plan
        ├── Test Plan
        ├── Sampling Plan
        ├── Reviewer Assignments
        └── Independence Controls
        │
        ▼
Assessment Execution
        │
        ├── Automated Validation
        ├── Manual Review
        ├── Inspection
        ├── Reperformance
        ├── Replay
        ├── Observation
        └── Confirmation
        │
        ▼
Findings and Conformance Outcome
        │
        ├── Conformant
        ├── Conformant with Conditions
        ├── Partially Conformant
        ├── Non-Conformant
        ├── Indeterminate
        └── Not Evaluated
        │
        ▼
Assurance and Certification Decision
        │
        ▼
Monitoring, Surveillance, Suspension, Withdrawal and Historical Verification

The CCCF SHALL remain independent of any one testing framework, policy engine, schema language, evidence repository, audit platform, certification body, accreditation body, workflow engine, signature technology, observability platform or public-verification portal.

27.1. Purpose

The purpose of the Core Conformance and Certification Framework is to establish a coherent and machine-governable system for:

defining conformance requirements;
resolving applicability;
planning assessments;
collecting evidence;
executing tests and reviews;
recording findings;
determining conformance outcomes;
granting or withholding certification under approved schemes;
monitoring continued conformance;
suspending or withdrawing claims;
preserving historical assessment state;
enabling independent verification.

The CCCF SHALL answer:

what subject is being assessed;
which version or state of that subject is assessed;
which Constitutional Baseline governs;
which requirements apply;
why each requirement applies;
which requirements do not apply;
which controls and tests satisfy each requirement;
which evidence supports each conclusion;
who performed the assessment;
under which authority and competence;
whether independence is required and satisfied;
which findings remain open;
whether exceptions or compensating controls exist;
what the conformance outcome means;
whether certification may be granted;
how long the result remains valid;
what monitoring or surveillance is required;
how the result may be challenged;
how historical conformance can be reconstructed.

27.1.1. Governing Question

The governing question of the CCCF is:

How can ZAYAZ make conformance and certification claims that are exact, bounded, evidence-backed, independently verifiable, tenant-safe, historically reconstructable and resistant to semantic inflation?

27.1.2. Relationship to Other Constitutional Frameworks

The CCCF SHALL consume authoritative requirements from the ZAYAZ constitutional stack.

It SHALL NOT redefine those requirements.

Framework	CCCF Relationship
Constitutional Definition Framework	Provides authoritative Core meaning and requirement sources
Constitutional Compiler Framework	Produces executable validation, test and conformance artefacts
Constitutional Runtime Framework	Resolves applicable Baselines, Runtime state and execution context
Constitutional Publication Framework	Governs release of conformance, assurance and certification claims
Constitutional Extension Framework	Provides Extension-specific requirements and Package evidence
Constitutional Evolution Framework	Governs change to Core requirements, profiles and certification foundations
CCCF	Assesses and certifies conformance against the applicable governed requirement set

27.1.3. Core Conformance Boundary

The Core Conformance Boundary defines the point at which an assessment claim concerns authoritative ZAYAZ Core requirements rather than optional implementation preferences.

A Core conformance claim SHALL bind to:

an exact Constitutional Baseline;
the applicable Core artefacts;
the applicable Runtime and Publication contracts;
the applicable Module and Component obligations;
the applicable tenant-isolation and security controls.

27.1.4. Conformance Is Not Implementation Similarity

An implementation MAY differ technically from a reference implementation and still conform where governed meaning, behaviour, controls and evidence satisfy the applicable criteria.

An implementation SHALL NOT be declared conformant merely because it resembles another implementation.

27.1.5. Conformance Is Not Deployment Success

Successful deployment SHALL not establish:

semantic conformance;
authority conformance;
evidence sufficiency;
tenant-isolation conformance;
Publication conformance;
historical replay conformance;
certification eligibility.

27.1.6. Conformance Is Not Absence of Known Defects

No known defect SHALL not be represented as proven conformance.

27.1.7. Conformance Is Not Legal Advice

The CCCF MAY incorporate legal and regulatory criteria through governed profiles.

A ZAYAZ conformance result SHALL not be represented as universal legal advice or universal legal compliance unless an applicable scheme explicitly and validly establishes that scope.

27.1.8. Certification Is Not Constitutional Authority

Certification confirms status under a Certification Scheme.

Certification SHALL not amend:

the Constitution;
Core meaning;
Extension meaning;
tenant authority;
Publication authority;
legal obligations.

27.1.9. Conformance Is Not Assurance

A conformance assessment MAY support an assurance engagement.

An assurance conclusion SHALL remain distinct and SHALL identify its own scope, criteria, evidence and independence.

27.1.10. Conformance Is Not Runtime Admission

Runtime Admission MAY require conformance evidence.

A conformant artefact MAY still be denied admission because of:

unsupported Runtime context;
revoked signature;
incompatible dependency;
tenant restriction;
security incident;
expired validity;
transition state.

27.1.11. Conformance Is Not Publication Eligibility

A conformant Runtime Outcome or assessment artefact MAY remain ineligible for Publication because of:

disclosure restriction;
missing approval;
assurance status;
confidentiality;
audience profile;
release conditions.

27.1.12. Conformance Is Not Accreditation

Accreditation concerns competence and authority of an assessment or certification body under an Accreditation Scheme.

A certification body SHALL not self-create accreditation authority.

27.2. Scope and Applicability

The CCCF SHALL apply to every formal claim that a defined ZAYAZ subject conforms to one or more governed requirements.

27.2.1. In-Scope Conformance Subjects

In-scope subjects MAY include:

Constitutional Baseline;
constitutional document;
Core artefact;
schema;
Registry;
Relationship Type;
graph projection;
policy;
decision logic;
computation;
methodology;
workflow;
event contract;
command contract;
Agent Profile;
model profile;
tool contract;
Module;
Component;
Runtime Bundle;
Runtime Manifest;
Extension;
Extension Package;
Extension Set;
Connector;
integration;
tenant;
white-label deployment;
organisation;
data set;
evidence set;
Publication Object;
Publication Package;
Publication Release;
assurance process;
certification body;
Certification Scheme;
public-verification service.

27.2.2. In-Scope Claim Types

Claim Types MAY include:

Core conformance;
Runtime conformance;
Extension conformance;
Module conformance;
Component conformance;
tenant conformance;
white-label conformance;
organisation conformance;
Publication conformance;
evidence conformance;
security conformance;
tenant-isolation conformance;
migration conformance;
historical-replay conformance;
certification-process conformance;
assessor-competence conformance.

27.2.3. In-Scope Assessment Modes

Assessment Modes MAY include:

first-party assessment;
second-party assessment;
third-party assessment;
automated validation;
continuous conformance;
point-in-time audit;
pre-activation assessment;
post-activation assessment;
surveillance;
recertification;
incident-triggered assessment;
historical assessment;
regulator-directed assessment.

27.2.4. Out-of-Scope Claims

The following SHALL not be represented as CCCF conformance unless formally assessed:

informal review;
peer feedback;
code quality opinion;
architecture preference;
market ranking;
customer satisfaction;
popularity;
self-description;
unverified badge;
AI-generated score;
test execution without applicability resolution;
document completeness without requirement evaluation.

27.2.5. Applicability Trigger

The CCCF applies where a statement uses or implies terms such as:

conformant;
compliant;
certified;
verified;
assured;
approved;
validated;
accredited;
attested;
audit-ready;
regulator-ready;
certification-ready;
fully aligned;
meets all requirements.

Claims SHALL use the term permitted by the governing outcome.

27.2.6. Claim Precision

A claim SHALL identify:

subject;
subject version or state;
Baseline;
profile;
scope;
outcome;
assessor;
validity;
limitations;
verification reference.

27.2.7. Multi-Subject Assessment

A multi-subject assessment SHALL preserve a separate outcome for each material subject unless a valid composite outcome rule exists.

27.2.8. Composite System Assessment

A composite system MAY include:

multiple Modules;
multiple Components;
multiple Extensions;
shared infrastructure;
tenant-specific overlays;
white-label overlays;
external services.

Composite conformance SHALL not conceal a non-conformant constituent.

27.2.9. Inherited Conformance

Conformance MAY be inherited only where:

the inherited subject is exact and valid;
the dependent subject uses the certified scope as assessed;
no material configuration changes the result;
tenant and white-label context is preserved;
dependency validity is current;
inheritance is permitted by the profile;
provenance is complete.

27.2.10. Transitive Conformance Prohibition

Conformance SHALL not be assumed transitively merely because:

one Component conforms;
one dependency is certified;
one cloud provider is certified;
one Module passes;
one tenant passes;
one environment passes.

27.2.11. External Certification Recognition

External certifications MAY be recognised as evidence where:

scheme identity is known;
scope is known;
criteria are mapped;
validity is current;
assessor competence is known;
limitations are known;
equivalence is governed.

Recognition SHALL not automatically establish CCCF certification.

27.2.12. Historical Applicability

Historical assessment SHALL use the Baseline, Runtime Bundle, Extension Set, Module and Component state applicable at the target time.

Current requirements SHALL not be applied retroactively unless the governing profile explicitly requires it.

27.3. Foundational Conformance Principles

Every conformance and certification action SHALL conform to a common set of constitutional principles.

27.3.1. Exact Subject Principle

Every assessment SHALL identify the exact subject.

Ambiguous subject identity SHALL block authoritative conformance.

27.3.2. Exact Requirement Principle

Every outcome SHALL bind to exact requirement identities and versions.

27.3.3. Exact Baseline Principle

Every Core conformance claim SHALL identify the governing Constitutional Baseline.

27.3.4. Applicability Before Testing

Applicability SHALL be resolved before a test result is interpreted as conformance evidence.

27.3.5. Evidence Before Claim

A claim SHALL not exceed the evidence supporting it.

27.3.6. Outcome Boundedness

A result SHALL be bounded by:

subject;
scope;
profile;
Baseline;
period;
environment;
tenant;
white-label deployment;
Modules;
Components;
Extensions;
limitations.

27.3.7. No Silent Assumptions

Material assumptions SHALL be explicit.

27.3.8. No Silent Exceptions

Exceptions SHALL be recorded, authorised, time-bound where applicable and visible to outcome determination.

27.3.9. No Silent Compensating Controls

A compensating control SHALL identify:

requirement addressed;
reason primary control is absent;
control objective;
evidence;
equivalence or residual gap;
authority;
validity;
provenance.

27.3.10. No Binary Inflation

A binary pass/fail projection MAY be used only where the underlying findings, conditions and limitations remain accessible.

27.3.11. Unknown Is Not Conformant

Unknown, Indeterminate, Not Evaluated and Evidence Unavailable SHALL not be represented as Conformant.

27.3.12. Version Integrity

A result for one version SHALL not be transferred to another version without governed impact analysis.

27.3.13. Temporal Integrity

A result SHALL distinguish:

assessment time;
evidence time;
subject valid time;
Baseline effective time;
outcome issue time;
validity end;
suspension time;
withdrawal time.

27.3.14. Tenant Integrity

An assessment SHALL preserve tenant and white-label boundaries across:

evidence;
test execution;
logs;
graph traversal;
agent memory;
samples;
findings;
reports;
public claims.

27.3.15. Independence Integrity

Where independence is claimed or required, it SHALL be demonstrable.

27.3.16. Competence Integrity

Assessment conclusions SHALL be made only by actors or Components competent for the assigned criteria.

27.3.17. Reproducibility

Objective tests SHOULD be reproducible using the same subject, Baseline, profile, inputs and test artefacts.

27.3.18. Explainability

Every material outcome SHALL be explainable through:

applicable requirements;
tests;
evidence;
findings;
exceptions;
judgement;
outcome rules;
provenance.

27.3.19. Historical Immutability

Issued outcomes, certifications, suspensions and withdrawals SHALL remain historically preserved.

Corrections SHALL create new governed state.

27.3.20. Certification Conservatism

Certification SHALL be granted only where the Certification Scheme permits and all mandatory decision conditions are satisfied.

27.3.21. No Self-Certifying Agent

An AI agent SHALL not certify itself, its own output, its own model or its own authority.

27.3.22. Module and Component Lineage

Every relevant result SHALL preserve:

Module;
Component;
capability;
contract version;
deployment context;
tenant;
Baseline;
provenance.

27.3.23. Publication Honesty

Public conformance and certification claims SHALL reflect exact current status, scope, validity and limitations.

27.3.24. Challengeability

Material outcomes SHALL support challenge, correction, appeal or reassessment according to the governing profile.

27.4. Conformance Domain Model

The CCCF SHALL represent conformance as a network of identifiable and versioned constitutional objects.

27.4.1. Core Conformance Objects

Core conformance objects SHALL include as applicable:

Conformance Subject;
Subject Snapshot;
Requirement Source;
Conformance Requirement;
Control Objective;
Control;
Criterion;
Test Specification;
Evidence Requirement;
Evidence Object;
Conformance Profile;
Applicability Decision;
Assessment Plan;
Assessment Activity;
Test Execution;
Finding;
Exception;
Compensating Control;
Remediation;
Conformance Outcome;
Assurance Engagement;
Certification Scheme;
Certification Decision;
Certificate;
Surveillance Plan;
Suspension;
Withdrawal;
Conformance Receipt;
Verification Record.

27.4.2. Conformance Subject

Every Conformance Subject SHALL possess:

Subject Identifier;
subject type;
canonical name;
owner;
tenant or white-label scope;
Module lineage;
Component lineage;
version or state;
lifecycle;
effective time;
classification;
provenance.

27.4.3. Subject Snapshot

A Subject Snapshot SHALL bind the assessed state through:

Subject Identifier;
subject version;
content or state digest;
configuration;
dependencies;
Runtime Bundle;
Runtime Manifest;
Extension Set;
Module versions;
Component versions;
environment;
tenant;
capture time;
provenance.

27.4.4. Requirement Source

A Requirement Source SHALL identify:

source identity;
authority;
version;
jurisdiction;
framework;
effective time;
precedence;
normative status;
provenance.

27.4.5. Conformance Requirement

A Conformance Requirement SHALL possess:

Requirement Identifier;
canonical statement;
requirement source;
normative force;
subject classes;
applicability;
control objectives;
criteria;
evidence requirements;
severity;
effective time;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.4.6. Control Objective

A Control Objective defines the intended governed state or outcome required to satisfy one or more requirements.

It SHALL not be confused with a specific implementation control.

27.4.7. Control

A Control is a defined mechanism intended to achieve a Control Objective.

Every Control SHALL possess:

Control Identifier;
objective;
owner;
implementation;
subject;
frequency;
evidence;
automation level;
effectiveness criteria;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.4.8. Criterion

A Criterion defines an assessable condition.

Criteria MAY be:

objective;
judgement-based;
quantitative;
qualitative;
deterministic;
probabilistic;
continuous;
point-in-time;
design-oriented;
operating-effectiveness-oriented.

27.4.9. Test Specification

A Test Specification defines how evidence is obtained or evaluated.

It SHALL identify:

Test Identifier;
criterion;
method;
inputs;
expected result;
tolerance;
environment;
actor or Component;
repeatability;
limitations;
provenance.

27.4.10. Evidence Requirement

An Evidence Requirement SHALL identify:

requirement or criterion;
evidence class;
minimum content;
authority;
freshness;
integrity;
retention;
confidentiality;
sampling;
provenance.

27.4.11. Finding

A Finding is an evidence-backed assessment result concerning one or more criteria.

27.4.12. Conformance Outcome

A Conformance Outcome aggregates applicable findings according to governed outcome rules.

It SHALL not conceal unresolved findings or exclusions.

27.4.13. Certification Scheme

A Certification Scheme defines the rules under which certification may be granted, maintained, suspended, withdrawn or renewed.

27.4.14. Certificate

A Certificate is a signed, scheme-bound representation of a valid Certification Decision.

A Certificate SHALL not exceed the Decision.

27.4.15. Conformance Graph

The CCCF SHOULD preserve a Conformance Graph connecting:

Requirement Source
        │
        ▼
Conformance Requirement
        │
        ├── Control Objective
        │       └── Control
        │
        ├── Criterion
        │       └── Test Specification
        │
        └── Evidence Requirement
                │
                ▼
Conformance Subject and Subject Snapshot
                │
                ▼
Assessment Plan
                │
                ▼
Assessment Activity and Test Execution
                │
                ▼
Evidence Object
                │
                ▼
Finding
                │
                ├── Exception
                ├── Compensating Control
                └── Remediation
                │
                ▼
Conformance Outcome
                │
                ├── Assurance Conclusion
                └── Certification Decision

27.4.16. Domain Object Identity

Every material domain object SHALL possess stable identity, lifecycle, version, temporal validity and provenance.

27.4.17. Object Separation

The following SHALL remain distinct:

Requirement;
Control Objective;
Control;
Criterion;
Test;
Evidence;
Finding;
Outcome;
Assurance Conclusion;
Certification Decision;
Certificate.

27.4.18. Domain Registry

The Conformance Domain Registry SHALL preserve:

object identities;
types;
versions;
relationships;
lifecycle;
owners;
authority;
provenance.

27.4.19. Domain Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

object identity;
type;
required properties;
relationships;
version;
lifecycle;
tenant scope;
Module and Component lineage;
provenance.

27.5. Conformance Architecture and Authority Boundaries

The CCCF SHALL operate through explicit separation of constitutional authority, assessment authority, validation capability, assurance authority, certification authority, accreditation authority, Publication authority and Runtime authority.

No actor, agent, Module, Component, certification body or external service SHALL infer authority from technical access alone.

27.5.1. Conformance Architecture Layers

The reference architecture SHALL include:

Constitutional Requirement Layer;
Conformance Definition Layer;
Profile and Applicability Layer;
Assessment Planning Layer;
Evidence Layer;
Validation and Test Layer;
Finding and Outcome Layer;
Assurance Layer;
Certification Layer;
Publication and Verification Layer;
Monitoring and Surveillance Layer;
Archive and Replay Layer.

27.5.2. Constitutional Requirement Layer

The Constitutional Requirement Layer SHALL contain authoritative requirements derived from:

Constitution;
Constitutional Baselines;
ratified Core artefacts;
governed Extension requirements;
Runtime contracts;
Publication contracts;
approved Certification Schemes;
approved Accreditation Schemes.

It SHALL not contain unratified implementation preferences as constitutional requirements.

27.5.3. Conformance Definition Layer

The Conformance Definition Layer SHALL transform authoritative requirements into governed:

requirement identities;
control objectives;
criteria;
evidence requirements;
outcome rules;
conformance profiles.

Transformation SHALL preserve source authority and semantic fidelity.

27.5.4. Profile and Applicability Layer

This layer SHALL resolve:

subject class;
Baseline;
jurisdiction;
framework;
business domain;
tenant;
white-label deployment;
Module;
Component;
Extension;
Runtime Bundle;
Publication class;
assessment purpose;
time.

27.5.5. Assessment Planning Layer

This layer SHALL define:

assessment scope;
activities;
tests;
evidence;
sampling;
reviewers;
independence;
schedule;
materiality;
limitations;
deliverables.

27.5.6. Evidence Layer

The Evidence Layer SHALL preserve:

evidence identity;
source;
integrity;
classification;
chain of custody;
tenant scope;
temporal validity;
retention;
provenance.

27.5.7. Validation and Test Layer

This layer MAY include:

HECATE;
schema validators;
graph validators;
policy test engines;
decision test engines;
computation comparison engines;
workflow replay engines;
security scanners;
tenant-isolation test engines;
evidence validators;
human inspection workflows.

27.5.8. Finding and Outcome Layer

This layer SHALL:

record test results;
derive Findings;
classify severity and materiality;
apply exception treatment;
determine outcome under governed rules;
preserve unresolved uncertainty;
produce receipts.

27.5.9. Assurance Layer

The Assurance Layer SHALL manage:

engagement identity;
subject matter;
criteria;
independence;
evidence;
procedures;
findings;
conclusion;
validity;
provenance.

27.5.10. Certification Layer

The Certification Layer SHALL manage:

Certification Schemes;
applicant;
assessment;
decision authority;
certification status;
Certificate;
conditions;
surveillance;
suspension;
withdrawal;
renewal;
provenance.

27.5.11. Publication and Verification Layer

The Publication and Verification Layer SHALL use the CPF to release:

conformance statements;
assurance statements;
certificates;
certification status;
suspension notices;
withdrawal notices;
public verification records.

27.5.12. Monitoring and Surveillance Layer

This layer SHALL evaluate whether conformance remains valid after issue.

27.5.13. Archive and Replay Layer

This layer SHALL support:

historical assessment reconstruction;
evidence verification;
test replay;
decision replay;
certificate verification;
supersession;
suspension and withdrawal history.

27.5.14. Conformance Roles

Conformance Roles MAY include:

Requirement Owner;
Profile Owner;
Scheme Owner;
Assessment Requester;
Assessment Sponsor;
Assessed-Subject Owner;
Assessment Planner;
Evidence Custodian;
Test Executor;
HECATE Validator;
Technical Assessor;
Domain Assessor;
Lead Assessor;
Independent Reviewer;
Assurance Provider;
Certification Decision Maker;
Certification Body;
Accreditation Body;
Surveillance Owner;
Remediation Owner;
Challenge Authority;
Appeal Authority;
Publication Authority;
Archive Authority.

27.5.15. Requirement Authority

Requirement Authority determines who may establish or change a conformance requirement.

Core requirements SHALL change only through Constitutional Evolution.

27.5.16. Profile Authority

Profile Authority determines who may assemble applicable requirements for a defined assessment purpose.

Profile Authority SHALL not change the source requirements.

27.5.17. Assessment Authority

Assessment Authority determines who may execute or supervise an assessment.

27.5.18. Outcome Authority

Outcome Authority determines who may issue a formal Conformance Outcome.

Objective automated outcomes MAY be produced by governed Components where the profile permits.

Judgement-dependent outcomes SHALL require authorised human or institutional decision.

27.5.19. Assurance Authority

Assurance Authority SHALL be assigned separately from assessment execution where independence is claimed.

27.5.20. Certification Authority

Certification Authority determines who may grant, maintain, suspend, withdraw or renew certification under a Scheme.

27.5.21. Accreditation Authority

Accreditation Authority determines who may recognise assessment or certification-body competence under an Accreditation Scheme.

27.5.22. Publication Authority

Publication Authority determines whether a conformance, assurance or certification claim may be released to a defined audience.

27.5.23. Runtime Authority

Runtime Authority determines whether assessment evidence is sufficient for:

Runtime Admission;
activation;
migration;
deployment;
continued operation.

A certification decision SHALL not automatically force Runtime Admission.

27.5.24. Separation of Duties

Separation of duties SHOULD distinguish:

Requirement Owner from assessed-subject owner;
assessor from remediation owner;
assessor from Certification Decision Maker;
assurance provider from implementer;
certification body from accreditation body;
test author from sole test approver;
evidence custodian from evidence source where material;
Publication Authority from certification applicant;
auditor from control operator.

27.5.25. Self-Assessment

Self-assessment MAY be permitted where the profile allows.

A self-assessment SHALL be labelled as first-party and SHALL not be represented as independent assurance or third-party certification.

27.5.26. Automated Assessment Authority

An automated Component MAY:

execute tests;
validate evidence;
classify objective Findings;
apply deterministic outcome rules;
produce draft receipts.

It SHALL NOT:

create missing authority;
claim independence;
resolve material legal ambiguity;
waive requirements;
approve its own material exception;
issue certification unless an approved Scheme explicitly permits automated decision and constitutional authority is validly assigned.

27.5.27. Agent Authority Boundary

An AI agent MAY assist with:

evidence classification;
requirement mapping;
test generation;
anomaly detection;
draft Findings;
impact analysis;
report drafting.

An AI agent SHALL NOT:

certify itself;
certify another subject autonomously;
accept residual risk;
waive a requirement;
determine accreditation;
issue an independent assurance conclusion;
conceal uncertainty.

27.5.28. Conflict of Interest

Every material conflict SHALL identify:

actor;
Role;
subject;
conflict;
disclosure;
mitigation;
recusal;
replacement;
provenance.

27.5.29. Delegated Conformance Authority

Delegation SHALL identify:

delegator;
delegate;
Role;
subject classes;
profiles or schemes;
scope;
time;
conditions;
redelegation;
revocation;
provenance.

27.5.30. Authority Revocation

Revocation SHALL preserve:

revoked authority;
actor;
reason;
effective time;
affected assessments;
affected outcomes;
affected certificates;
replacement;
provenance.

27.5.31. Conformance Architecture Receipt

A receipt SHOULD identify:

architecture profile;
active authority assignments;
Modules;
Components;
validation engines;
assurance and certification bodies;
Publication and archive services;
effective time;
provenance.

27.5.32. Authority Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

Role identity;
authority;
scope;
delegation;
independence requirements;
conflicts;
revocation;
Module and Component ownership;
provenance.

27.6. Conformance Subjects and Units of Assessment

A conformance assessment SHALL define a Unit of Assessment that is sufficiently precise to support repeatable evidence collection, testing, outcome determination and historical reconstruction.

27.6.1. Unit of Assessment Identity

Every Unit of Assessment SHALL possess:

Unit Identifier;
Conformance Subject;
subject type;
subject version or Snapshot;
Baseline;
Conformance Profile;
environment;
tenant or white-label scope;
jurisdiction;
Module scope;
Component scope;
Extension scope;
Runtime scope;
Publication scope;
assessment period;
exclusions;
provenance.

27.6.2. Unit Types

Unit Types MAY include:

artefact unit;
Package unit;
Runtime Bundle unit;
Module unit;
Component unit;
Extension unit;
tenant unit;
white-label deployment unit;
organisation unit;
process unit;
control unit;
data-domain unit;
graph-domain unit;
Publication unit;
composite system unit;
certification-body unit.

27.6.3. Artefact Unit

An artefact unit MAY include:

schema;
Registry;
policy;
computation;
workflow;
event contract;
Agent Profile;
tool contract;
Publication Profile.

It SHALL bind to exact version and digest.

27.6.4. Runtime Unit

A Runtime unit SHALL bind to:

Constitutional Baseline;
Runtime Bundle;
Runtime Manifest;
environment;
tenant or cohort;
Extension Set;
Module versions;
Component versions;
configuration;
effective time.

27.6.5. Module Unit

A Module assessment SHALL identify:

Module identity;
constitutional responsibility;
owned capabilities;
owned Components;
owned data;
owned events and commands;
owned policies and workflows;
external contracts;
tenant scope;
Runtime context.

27.6.6. Component Unit

A Component assessment SHALL identify:

Component identity;
owning Module;
capability;
input and output contracts;
authority;
state;
side effects;
security;
reliability;
deployment;
tenant scope;
version.

27.6.7. Extension Unit

An Extension assessment SHALL identify:

Extension Series;
Extension Package;
Manifest;
Extension Point;
Namespace;
dependencies;
adoption state;
activation state;
tenant or white-label scope;
Runtime Bundle;
Core Baseline.

27.6.8. Tenant Unit

A tenant assessment SHALL identify:

Tenant Identifier;
white-label operator where applicable;
active Baseline;
Runtime Bundle;
Extension Set;
Modules and Components used;
data and graph scope;
integrations;
Publications;
assessment period;
exclusions.

27.6.9. White-Label Unit

A white-label assessment SHALL identify:

operator;
tenant population;
operator Extensions;
shared Modules and Components;
public domains;
branded Publications;
operator integrations;
support and governance;
jurisdictions;
period.

27.6.10. Organisation Unit

An organisation assessment SHALL distinguish:

organisation identity;
tenant;
organisational boundary;
legal entities;
sites;
reporting boundary;
data boundary;
responsibility boundary;
Publication boundary.

27.6.11. Publication Unit

A Publication assessment SHALL identify:

Publication Object;
Package;
Manifest;
Release;
audience;
channel;
source Baseline;
source Runtime Outcome;
assurance;
correction state;
period.

27.6.12. Composite Unit

A Composite Unit SHALL identify all constituent subjects and their dependencies.

Composite outcome rules SHALL define whether:

every constituent must conform;
critical constituents must conform;
weighted aggregation is permitted;
conditions are permitted;
one critical failure overrides aggregate results.

27.6.13. Assessment Boundary

The boundary SHALL identify:

included systems;
excluded systems;
shared systems;
external dependencies;
manual processes;
organisational controls;
tenant overlays;
white-label overlays;
environments;
locations;
periods.

27.6.14. Exclusion

Every exclusion SHALL identify:

excluded subject;
reason;
authority;
materiality;
effect on outcome;
disclosure;
provenance.

An exclusion SHALL not be used to remove a mandatory applicable subject.

27.6.15. Dependency Boundary

Dependencies SHALL be classified as:

included and assessed;
inherited;
externally certified;
relied upon without certification;
excluded with limitation;
unavailable;
prohibited.

27.6.16. Shared Responsibility

A shared-responsibility model SHALL identify:

provider responsibility;
operator responsibility;
tenant responsibility;
organisation responsibility;
Extension publisher responsibility;
assessor responsibility;
evidence responsibility;
residual gap.

27.6.17. Subject Materiality

Subject materiality MAY consider:

constitutional criticality;
legal impact;
security;
tenant isolation;
data volume;
transaction volume;
Publication impact;
dependency centrality;
number of tenants;
number of jurisdictions;
reversibility.

27.6.18. Subject Criticality

Criticality MAY be:

Low;
Moderate;
High;
Critical;
Foundational.

Critical and Foundational subjects SHALL receive heightened assessment.

27.6.19. Subject Snapshot Freeze

A point-in-time assessment SHALL freeze the Subject Snapshot before final testing.

Material post-freeze change SHALL require:

impact analysis;
partial retest;
full retest;
new assessment version

according to the profile.

27.6.20. Dynamic Subject

A dynamic subject MAY require:

continuous evidence;
observation window;
configuration drift monitoring;
model drift monitoring;
Runtime Manifest monitoring;
Extension Set monitoring;
control-operating-effectiveness evidence.

27.6.21. Historical Subject

A historical subject SHALL preserve the state that existed at the target time rather than reconstructing only the current version.

27.6.22. Subject Ownership

Ownership SHALL identify who is accountable for:

subject definition;
evidence;
remediation;
change notification;
surveillance support;
certification maintenance;
provenance.

Ownership SHALL not establish assessment independence.

27.6.23. Subject Registry

The Conformance Subject Registry SHALL preserve:

identities;
subject classes;
owners;
Snapshots;
Baselines;
tenant and white-label scope;
Module and Component lineage;
assessment history;
certification history;
provenance.

27.6.24. Unit Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

Unit identity;
subject identity;
Snapshot;
Baseline;
profile;
boundary;
exclusions;
dependencies;
tenant and white-label scope;
Module and Component lineage;
provenance.

27.7. Conformance Requirement, Control and Criterion Model

The CCCF SHALL transform authoritative constitutional requirements into assessable structures without weakening, strengthening or reinterpreting the source meaning.

27.7.1. Requirement Identity

Every requirement SHALL possess:

Requirement Identifier;
source artefact;
source section or object;
canonical statement;
normative force;
subject classes;
applicability expression;
control objectives;
criteria;
evidence requirements;
severity;
effective time;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.7.2. Normative Force

Normative Force MAY include:

SHALL;
SHALL NOT;
SHOULD;
SHOULD NOT;
MAY;
CONDITIONALLY REQUIRED;
PROHIBITED;
RECOMMENDED;
OPTIONAL;
INFORMATIONAL.

The source meaning SHALL govern.

27.7.3. Requirement Classes

Requirement Classes MAY include:

Constitutional Requirement;
Semantic Requirement;
Identity Requirement;
Structural Requirement;
Behavioural Requirement;
Authority Requirement;
Security Requirement;
Tenant-Isolation Requirement;
Privacy Requirement;
Evidence Requirement;
Runtime Requirement;
Reliability Requirement;
Module Requirement;
Component Requirement;
Extension Requirement;
Publication Requirement;
Assurance Requirement;
Certification Requirement;
Archive Requirement;
Historical-Replay Requirement.

27.7.4. Requirement Source Hierarchy

Where sources conflict, the constitutional source hierarchy SHALL govern.

The CCCF SHALL record:

conflicting requirements;
precedence;
resolution authority;
unresolved conflict;
outcome effect;
provenance.

27.7.5. Requirement Decomposition

A complex requirement MAY be decomposed into assessable criteria only where:

source meaning is preserved;
completeness is demonstrated;
logical relationships are explicit;
no obligation is omitted;
provenance links remain.

27.7.6. Requirement Composition

Multiple requirements MAY contribute to one Control Objective or Criterion.

Composition SHALL preserve each source requirement.

27.7.7. Control Objective Identity

Every Control Objective SHALL possess:

Objective Identifier;
canonical statement;
source requirements;
subject classes;
expected state;
risk addressed;
outcome rule;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.7.8. Control Design

A Control SHALL define:

implementation description;
control owner;
control operator;
frequency;
trigger;
inputs;
action;
output;
evidence;
exceptions;
monitoring;
provenance.

27.7.9. Preventive Control

A preventive control seeks to prevent non-conformant state.

27.7.10. Detective Control

A detective control seeks to identify non-conformant state after or during occurrence.

27.7.11. Corrective Control

A corrective control seeks to remediate or contain identified non-conformant state.

27.7.12. Directive Control

A directive control establishes required behaviour, instruction or governance.

27.7.13. Manual Control

A manual control SHALL identify:

actor;
competence;
frequency;
evidence;
review;
segregation;
failure handling.

27.7.14. Automated Control

An automated control SHALL identify:

implementing Component;
owning Module;
code or artefact version;
configuration;
dependencies;
monitoring;
override;
failure mode;
evidence;
provenance.

27.7.15. Hybrid Control

A hybrid control SHALL distinguish automated and human responsibilities.

27.7.16. Control Design Effectiveness

Design effectiveness evaluates whether a Control, if operated as designed, could satisfy the Control Objective.

27.7.17. Control Operating Effectiveness

Operating effectiveness evaluates whether a Control operated consistently and effectively over the assessment period.

27.7.18. Criterion Identity

Every Criterion SHALL possess:

Criterion Identifier;
requirement or objective;
assessable statement;
subject;
method class;
expected state;
tolerance;
severity;
evidence;
outcome rule;
version;
provenance.

27.7.19. Criterion Types

Criterion Types MAY include:

Presence Criterion;
Absence Criterion;
Equality Criterion;
Range Criterion;
Cardinality Criterion;
Integrity Criterion;
Authority Criterion;
Separation-of-Duties Criterion;
Temporal Criterion;
Tenant-Isolation Criterion;
Behavioural Criterion;
Performance Criterion;
Reliability Criterion;
Evidence Criterion;
Explanation Criterion;
Historical-Replay Criterion;
Publication Criterion;
Judgement Criterion.

27.7.20. Objective Criterion

An objective criterion SHALL produce the same governed result from the same relevant evidence and method, subject to declared tolerance.

27.7.21. Judgement Criterion

A judgement criterion SHALL identify:

competence required;
decision factors;
evidence;
materiality;
uncertainty;
reviewer;
rationale;
challenge path.

27.7.22. Quantitative Criterion

A quantitative criterion SHALL define:

metric;
numerator;
denominator;
unit;
calculation;
threshold;
tolerance;
period;
missing-data treatment.

27.7.23. Qualitative Criterion

A qualitative criterion SHALL define:

expected attributes;
evaluation rubric;
evidence;
rating scale;
reviewer competence;
uncertainty;
rationale.

27.7.24. Criterion Severity

Severity MAY be:

Informational;
Advisory;
Minor;
Moderate;
Major;
Critical;
Certification-Blocking;
Activation-Blocking;
Publication-Blocking.

27.7.25. Mandatory Criterion

Failure of a mandatory criterion SHALL affect outcome according to the profile.

It SHALL not be silently offset by unrelated passing criteria.

27.7.26. Optional Criterion

An optional criterion SHALL not be represented as mandatory.

Its result MAY support maturity, recommendation or additional certification scope.

27.7.27. Conditional Criterion

A conditional criterion SHALL define the condition that makes it applicable.

27.7.28. Compound Criterion

A compound criterion SHALL define logical composition such as:

all;
any;
one-of;
exactly-one;
threshold count;
weighted threshold;
ordered dependency.

27.7.29. Control Mapping

Every mapping SHALL identify:

requirement;
Control Objective;
Control;
Criterion;
coverage;
limitations;
overlap;
evidence;
provenance.

27.7.30. Coverage Classification

Coverage MAY be:

Complete;
Complete with Multiple Controls;
Partial;
Compensating;
Indirect;
Unverified;
No Coverage;
Not Applicable.

27.7.31. Control Redundancy

Redundant controls MAY improve resilience.

Redundancy SHALL not conceal that each Control has separate design and operating-effectiveness evidence.

27.7.32. Control Dependency

A Control dependency SHALL identify:

dependent Control;
prerequisite Control;
shared Component;
shared evidence;
common-cause failure;
tenant scope;
provenance.

27.7.33. Common-Control Framework

A common Control MAY support multiple tenants or subjects where:

control scope is exact;
tenant isolation is preserved;
evidence is appropriately partitioned;
deviations are identified;
inheritance is permitted;
validity is current.

27.7.34. Requirement Change

A requirement change SHALL follow Constitutional Evolution where Core meaning changes.

Affected profiles, controls, tests, assessments and certificates SHALL be impact-analysed.

27.7.35. Requirement Registry

The Requirement Registry SHALL preserve:

identities;
sources;
versions;
mappings;
applicability;
lifecycle;
supersession;
impacted profiles;
provenance.

27.7.36. Requirement Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

requirement identity;
source binding;
normative force;
decomposition;
objectives;
Controls;
criteria;
mappings;
coverage;
lifecycle;
provenance.

27.8. Conformance Profiles and Applicability Resolution

A Conformance Profile is the governed and versioned specification of which requirements, criteria, methods, evidence rules and outcome rules apply to a defined assessment purpose and subject class.

A Profile SHALL assemble requirements.

It SHALL not silently rewrite them.

27.8.1. Conformance Profile Identity

Every Conformance Profile SHALL possess:

Profile Identifier;
canonical name;
profile owner;
subject classes;
source Baselines;
jurisdictions;
frameworks;
business domains;
tenant or white-label scope;
Module and Component scope;
Extension scope;
Runtime scope;
Publication scope;
requirement inventory;
applicability rules;
assessment methods;
evidence requirements;
outcome rules;
validity;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.8.2. Profile Types

Profile Types MAY include:

Core Baseline Conformance Profile;
Runtime Conformance Profile;
Module Conformance Profile;
Component Conformance Profile;
Extension Conformance Profile;
Tenant Conformance Profile;
White-Label Conformance Profile;
Organisation Conformance Profile;
Security Conformance Profile;
Tenant-Isolation Profile;
Publication Conformance Profile;
Historical-Replay Profile;
Migration Conformance Profile;
Certification Profile;
Surveillance Profile;
Recertification Profile.

27.8.3. Profile Layers

Profile resolution MAY use:

Core Constitutional Profile
        │
        ▼
Baseline Profile
        │
        ▼
Framework Profile
        │
        ▼
Jurisdiction Profile
        │
        ▼
White-Label Profile
        │
        ▼
Tenant Profile
        │
        ▼
Organisation or Subject Profile
        │
        ▼
Module and Component Profile
        │
        ▼
Extension Profile
        │
        ▼
Assessment-Purpose Profile
        │
        ▼
Certification Scheme Profile

27.8.4. Profile Resolution Order

The resolution order SHALL be explicit.

A lower layer SHALL not weaken non-overrideable higher-layer requirements.

27.8.5. Core Profile

The Core Profile SHALL define minimum constitutional conformance requirements applicable to every subject class within its scope.

27.8.6. Baseline Profile

A Baseline Profile SHALL bind requirements to an exact Constitutional Baseline and effective period.

27.8.7. Framework Profile

A Framework Profile MAY include requirements arising from:

reporting framework;
methodology;
industry standard;
assurance standard;
certification standard.

It SHALL preserve external source identity and internal mapping.

27.8.8. Jurisdiction Profile

A Jurisdiction Profile SHALL identify:

jurisdiction;
legal entities;
regulatory scope;
effective dates;
transitional provisions;
local evidence;
local language;
conflicts;
provenance.

27.8.9. White-Label Profile

A White-Label Profile MAY add:

operator governance;
operator Extensions;
branding and Publication controls;
shared Components;
tenant support;
operator-specific evidence.

It SHALL not weaken Core tenant-isolation requirements.

27.8.10. Tenant Profile

A Tenant Profile MAY add:

tenant policies;
tenant Extensions;
organisational controls;
local evidence;
business-domain requirements;
contractual requirements.

Tenant requirements SHALL remain distinguishable from Core requirements.

27.8.11. Module Profile

A Module Profile SHALL identify:

Module responsibilities;
owned Components;
capabilities;
data and event ownership;
contracts;
reliability;
security;
evidence;
conformance criteria.

27.8.12. Component Profile

A Component Profile SHALL identify:

Component obligations;
owning Module;
capability;
contracts;
state;
side effects;
deployment;
security;
tenant context;
evidence.

27.8.13. Extension Profile

An Extension Profile SHALL identify:

Extension Point;
Namespace;
Package requirements;
Manifest requirements;
dependency requirements;
Runtime requirements;
tenant scope;
Publication effects;
evidence.

27.8.14. Assessment-Purpose Profile

Purpose MAY include:

development validation;
pre-release conformance;
Runtime Admission;
tenant onboarding;
certification;
surveillance;
incident response;
historical verification;
Publication release.

27.8.15. Profile Requirement Inventory

The inventory SHALL identify for every requirement:

Requirement Identifier;
source;
applicability;
mandatory status;
severity;
control mapping;
test mapping;
evidence requirement;
outcome effect;
provenance.

27.8.16. Applicability Context

Applicability SHALL use an explicit context including:

subject;
subject type;
Baseline;
jurisdiction;
framework;
tenant;
white-label deployment;
organisation;
Module;
Component;
Extension;
Runtime Bundle;
environment;
Publication class;
time;
purpose.

27.8.17. Applicability Decision

Every material Applicability Decision SHALL possess:

Applicability Decision Identifier;
profile;
requirement;
subject;
context;
condition evaluation;
decision;
reason;
authority or Component;
time;
provenance.

27.8.18. Applicability Outcomes

Outcomes MAY include:

Applicable;
Applicable with Conditions;
Not Applicable;
Exempt by Authority;
Deferred;
Grandfathered;
Unable to Determine;
Not Evaluated.

27.8.19. Not Applicable

Not Applicable SHALL require:

requirement;
subject;
reason;
applicability evidence;
authority or deterministic rule;
effect on outcome;
provenance.

27.8.20. Exemption

An exemption SHALL identify:

requirement;
subject;
authority;
legal or constitutional basis;
scope;
compensating controls;
start;
expiration;
review;
provenance.

27.8.21. Deferred Requirement

Deferral SHALL identify:

requirement;
reason;
authority;
target date;
interim control;
outcome effect;
surveillance;
provenance.

27.8.22. Grandfathered Requirement

Grandfathering SHALL identify:

source Baseline;
target Baseline;
eligible subject;
preserved state;
prohibited new state;
end condition;
review;
provenance.

27.8.23. Unable to Determine

Unable to Determine SHALL be treated as unresolved applicability.

It SHALL not be represented as Not Applicable.

27.8.24. Applicability Conflict

A conflict exists where profile layers produce incompatible applicability.

Conflict resolution SHALL preserve:

conflicting rules;
source authority;
precedence;
decision;
uncertainty;
provenance.

27.8.25. Profile Conflict

A subject may be assessed under multiple Profiles.

The relationship SHALL be:

cumulative;
alternative;
nested;
overlapping;
mutually exclusive;
precedence-governed.

27.8.26. Profile Composition

Profile composition SHALL preserve:

source Profiles;
requirement identities;
duplicates;
conflicts;
stricter requirements;
exceptions;
outcome rules;
provenance.

27.8.27. Profile Equivalence

Profile equivalence SHALL not be claimed without comparing:

subject classes;
requirements;
applicability;
evidence;
methods;
severity;
outcome rules;
validity.

27.8.28. Profile Versioning

Profile versions SHALL be immutable after release.

Changes SHALL create a new version and impact analysis.

27.8.29. Profile Lifecycle

Lifecycle MAY include:

Draft;
Review;
Approved;
Active;
Active with Conditions;
Deprecated;
Superseded;
Withdrawn;
Retired;
Historical Only.

27.8.30. Profile Activation

Profile activation SHALL identify:

version;
Baseline;
scope;
effective time;
authority;
transition;
impacted assessments;
impacted certificates;
provenance.

27.8.31. Profile Change Impact

A change SHALL evaluate:

active assessments;
existing Outcomes;
open Findings;
Certifications;
surveillance;
tenants;
white-label deployments;
Modules;
Components;
Extensions;
Publications;
historical comparison.

27.8.32. Profile Registry

The Profile Registry SHALL preserve:

identities;
versions;
owners;
scopes;
requirements;
applicability rules;
outcome rules;
lifecycle;
supersession;
provenance.

27.8.33. Profile Resolution Receipt

A receipt SHOULD contain:

subject;
context;
resolved Profiles;
applicable requirements;
non-applicable requirements;
exemptions;
conflicts;
resolution authority;
time;
provenance.

27.8.34. Profile Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

Profile identity;
source Baseline;
requirement inventory;
layer order;
applicability rules;
non-overrideable requirements;
conflicts;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.9. Evidence, Findings, Exceptions and Conformance Outcomes

Conformance SHALL be evidence-backed.

Evidence SHALL be sufficient, relevant, reliable, attributable, integrity-protected, temporally appropriate and scoped to the assessed subject.

A Conformance Outcome SHALL be derived from applicable requirements, valid evidence, assessment activities, Findings, exceptions and governed outcome rules.

27.9.1. Evidence Object

Every material Evidence Object SHALL possess:

Evidence Identifier;
evidence class;
evidence source;
source authority;
Conformance Subject;
Subject Snapshot;
related requirements and criteria;
acquisition method;
acquisition time;
valid time;
integrity state;
classification;
tenant and white-label scope;
chain of custody;
freshness;
limitations;
retention;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.9.2. Evidence Classes

Evidence Classes MAY include:

constitutional source;
design artefact;
implementation artefact;
configuration;
source code;
build artefact;
Package Manifest;
Runtime Manifest;
policy result;
decision receipt;
computation receipt;
workflow history;
event history;
agent trace;
tool invocation record;
Connector receipt;
system log;
audit log;
telemetry;
test result;
replay result;
inspection record;
interview record;
observation;
confirmation;
contract;
legal opinion;
regulator communication;
assurance report;
external certificate;
Publication Release;
archive record.

27.9.3. Evidence Source Types

Source Types MAY include:

authoritative constitutional source;
system-generated source;
human-generated source;
tenant-provided source;
white-label-provided source;
external provider source;
independent assessor source;
assurance-provider source;
regulator source;
public source;
derived analytical source;
AI-generated source.

27.9.4. Evidence Authority

Evidence authority SHALL distinguish:

authoritative evidence of requirement;
authoritative evidence of state;
corroborating evidence;
testimonial evidence;
analytical evidence;
inferred evidence;
unverified assertion.

27.9.5. Evidence Sufficiency

Sufficiency SHALL consider:

coverage;
sample size;
period;
frequency;
subject criticality;
criterion severity;
control frequency;
population variability;
exception rate;
confidence;
limitations.

27.9.6. Evidence Relevance

Evidence is relevant only where it supports the specific subject, Snapshot, criterion, period and context assessed.

27.9.7. Evidence Reliability

Reliability SHALL consider:

source independence;
system integrity;
reproducibility;
tamper resistance;
completeness;
competence;
chain of custody;
consistency;
corroboration.

27.9.8. Evidence Freshness

Freshness SHALL be resolved relative to:

subject volatility;
control frequency;
Baseline changes;
Runtime changes;
Extension changes;
incident history;
assessment purpose;
Certification Scheme.

27.9.9. Evidence Integrity

Integrity MAY be protected through:

digest;
signature;
trusted timestamp;
immutable storage;
event sequencing;
chain-of-custody record;
access control;
replication verification;
provenance graph.

27.9.10. Evidence Classification

Classification MAY include:

Public;
Internal;
Confidential;
Restricted;
Tenant Confidential;
White-Label Confidential;
Security Sensitive;
Legal Privilege;
Regulator Restricted;
Personal Data;
Trade Secret.

27.9.11. Evidence Tenant Isolation

Evidence SHALL preserve tenant and white-label boundaries.

Cross-tenant evidence MAY be used only where:

aggregation is authorised;
identifiers are protected;
the requirement concerns a common control;
tenant-specific deviations remain detectable;
access is governed;
provenance is complete.

27.9.12. Evidence Chain of Custody

Chain of custody SHALL identify:

evidence source;
collector;
transfer;
storage;
access;
transformation;
review;
export;
archive;
destruction;
provenance.

27.9.13. Evidence Transformation

A transformed Evidence Object SHALL preserve:

source Evidence Identifier;
transformation method;
Component or actor;
source digest;
target digest;
information loss;
authority;
time;
provenance.

27.9.14. Derived Evidence

Derived evidence MAY include:

aggregate;
calculated metric;
anomaly score;
inferred relationship;
model output;
risk score;
trend.

Derived evidence SHALL preserve source evidence and methodology.

27.9.15. AI-Generated Evidence Analysis

AI MAY classify, summarise or identify patterns in evidence.

AI analysis SHALL:

identify the model or Agent Profile;
identify source evidence;
preserve prompt or instruction context where required;
state uncertainty;
remain reviewable;
avoid creating facts not supported by evidence;
remain non-authoritative until governed review.

27.9.16. Evidence Gap

An Evidence Gap SHALL possess:

Gap Identifier;
requirement or criterion;
missing evidence;
reason;
materiality;
alternative evidence;
effect on Finding;
effect on Outcome;
remediation;
owner;
provenance.

27.9.17. Evidence Conflict

Conflicting evidence SHALL preserve:

each Evidence Object;
conflicting assertions;
authority;
period;
subject;
resolution method;
unresolved uncertainty;
outcome effect;
provenance.

27.9.18. Evidence Sampling

Sampling SHALL identify:

population;
sampling unit;
method;
sample size;
selection;
period;
exclusions;
expected confidence;
tolerable deviation;
observed deviation;
limitations;
provenance.

27.9.19. Sampling Methods

Methods MAY include:

full population;
random;
systematic;
stratified;
risk-based;
judgemental;
attribute sampling;
variable sampling;
continuous sampling;
event-triggered sampling.

27.9.20. Sampling Limitation

A sample-based conclusion SHALL not be represented as full-population certainty beyond the profile's permitted inference.

27.9.21. Test Execution Object

Every Test Execution SHALL possess:

Test Execution Identifier;
Test Specification;
subject;
Snapshot;
environment;
input;
expected result;
actual result;
tolerance;
executor;
executing Component;
start and end time;
result;
logs;
Evidence Objects;
provenance.

27.9.22. Test Result Classes

Result Classes MAY include:

Pass;
Pass with Observation;
Fail;
Error;
Blocked;
Not Applicable;
Not Executed;
Indeterminate.

Error, Blocked, Not Executed and Indeterminate SHALL not be treated as Pass.

27.9.23. Finding Identity

Every Finding SHALL possess:

Finding Identifier;
assessment;
subject;
Snapshot;
requirement;
criterion;
evidence;
observed state;
expected state;
Finding class;
severity;
materiality;
confidence;
affected scope;
root-cause hypothesis;
remediation;
owner;
lifecycle;
provenance.

27.9.24. Finding Classes

Finding Classes MAY include:

Conformant Finding;
Observation;
Opportunity for Improvement;
Minor Non-Conformity;
Major Non-Conformity;
Critical Non-Conformity;
Evidence Gap;
Applicability Conflict;
Control Design Deficiency;
Control Operating Deficiency;
Tenant-Isolation Deficiency;
Security Deficiency;
Publication Deficiency;
Historical-Replay Deficiency;
Certification-Process Deficiency.

27.9.25. Finding Severity

Severity SHALL consider:

normative force;
subject criticality;
Protected Invariant impact;
security;
tenant isolation;
legal or regulatory impact;
Publication impact;
prevalence;
duration;
reversibility;
evidence reliability.

27.9.26. Finding Materiality

Materiality SHALL be evaluated relative to the assessment purpose and profile.

A numerically small issue MAY be material where it affects:

authority;
tenant isolation;
public claims;
identity;
legal obligation;
critical workflow;
historical truth.

27.9.27. Finding Confidence

Confidence MAY be:

Confirmed;
High;
Moderate;
Low;
Suspected;
Indeterminate.

Low-confidence adverse indicators SHALL be investigated rather than silently dismissed.

27.9.28. Finding Aggregation

Aggregation SHALL preserve:

individual Findings;
aggregation rule;
common root cause;
affected subjects;
severity transformation;
outcome effect;
provenance.

27.9.29. Systemic Finding

A Systemic Finding indicates a shared cause or pattern across:

requirements;
Controls;
Modules;
Components;
tenants;
white-label deployments;
Extensions;
environments;
periods.

27.9.30. Exception Object

Every Exception SHALL possess:

Exception Identifier;
requirement or criterion;
subject;
reason;
authority;
scope;
start time;
expiration;
compensating controls;
residual risk;
monitoring;
review;
outcome effect;
provenance.

27.9.31. Exception Types

Types MAY include:

Constitutional Exception where constitutionally permitted;
Transitional Exception;
Technical Exception;
Tenant Exception;
White-Label Exception;
Jurisdictional Exception;
Security Exception;
Evidence Exception;
Certification Exception;
Emergency Exception.

27.9.32. Prohibited Exception

An exception SHALL NOT:

waive a non-exceptionable Protected Invariant;
create certification authority;
conceal non-conformance;
permit cross-tenant leakage;
rewrite historical evidence;
extend indefinitely without review;
convert Unknown into Conformant.

27.9.33. Compensating Control

Every Compensating Control SHALL identify:

primary requirement;
absent or deficient primary Control;
compensating objective;
implementation;
owner;
evidence;
equivalence assessment;
residual gap;
validity;
approval;
provenance.

27.9.34. Equivalence Assessment

A compensating Control SHALL be evaluated for:

objective equivalence;
coverage;
timing;
reliability;
independence;
failure mode;
tenant scope;
residual risk.

27.9.35. Remediation Object

Every material Remediation SHALL possess:

Remediation Identifier;
Finding;
action;
owner;
target state;
target date;
dependencies;
validation method;
closure authority;
status;
provenance.

27.9.36. Remediation States

States MAY include:

Proposed;
Approved;
In Progress;
Implemented;
Awaiting Validation;
Validated;
Rejected;
Deferred;
Overdue;
Closed;
Reopened.

27.9.37. Finding Closure

Closure SHALL require:

remediation implemented or accepted disposition;
evidence;
validation;
valid authority;
residual risk;
outcome reassessment where required;
provenance.

27.9.38. Conformance Outcome Identity

Every Conformance Outcome SHALL possess:

Outcome Identifier;
assessment;
subject;
Subject Snapshot;
Baseline;
Conformance Profile;
applicable requirement inventory;
Findings;
exceptions;
compensating controls;
unresolved gaps;
outcome class;
scope;
limitations;
issue time;
validity;
decision authority;
signatures where required;
provenance.

27.9.39. Outcome Classes

Outcome Classes MAY include:

Conformant;
Conformant with Conditions;
Partially Conformant;
Non-Conformant;
Indeterminate;
Not Evaluated;
Withdrawn.

27.9.40. Conformant

Conformant SHALL require:

all applicable mandatory requirements satisfied;
no unresolved blocking Finding;
evidence sufficient;
exceptions valid;
outcome authority valid;
provenance sufficient.

27.9.41. Conformant with Conditions

Conditions SHALL identify:

unmet or transitional matter;
permitted scope;
required action;
owner;
deadline;
monitoring;
failure consequence;
provenance.

27.9.42. Partially Conformant

Partially Conformant SHALL identify:

conformant scope;
non-conformant scope;
unevaluated scope;
limitations;
prohibition on misleading aggregate claims;
provenance.

27.9.43. Non-Conformant

Non-Conformant SHALL identify the blocking requirements and Findings.

27.9.44. Indeterminate

Indeterminate SHALL be used where evidence, applicability, authority or assessment completeness is insufficient to conclude.

27.9.45. Not Evaluated

Not Evaluated indicates no governed assessment conclusion for the stated scope.

27.9.46. Outcome Aggregation Rule

Every aggregate outcome SHALL identify:

constituent outcomes;
aggregation method;
blocking criteria;
weighting where permitted;
exclusions;
conditions;
provenance.

27.9.47. Outcome Validity

Validity SHALL depend on:

subject stability;
Baseline validity;
Profile validity;
evidence freshness;
unresolved conditions;
surveillance;
incidents;
version changes;
authority.

27.9.48. Outcome Correction

An erroneous Outcome SHALL be corrected through a new governed Outcome or correction record.

The original SHALL remain historically preserved.

27.9.49. Outcome Receipt

A Conformance Receipt SHOULD contain:

subject;
Snapshot;
Baseline;
profile;
applicable requirements;
assessment methods;
evidence references;
Findings;
exceptions;
outcome;
conditions;
validity;
authority;
signatures;
provenance.

27.9.50. Evidence and Outcome Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

Evidence identity;
integrity;
tenant scope;
chain of custody;
Test Execution;
Finding;
exception;
compensating Control;
remediation;
Outcome derivation;
validity;
provenance.

HECATE SHALL not convert insufficient evidence into conformance.

27.10. Conformance Assessment Lifecycle

Every formal conformance assessment SHALL follow an explicit lifecycle from request through closure, monitoring and historical preservation.

Lifecycle state SHALL determine which activities, decisions, changes and claims are permitted.

27.10.1. Reference Assessment Lifecycle

Assessment Requested
        │
        ▼
Request Admitted
        │
        ▼
Subject and Scope Defined
        │
        ▼
Profile and Applicability Resolved
        │
        ▼
Assessment Plan Approved
        │
        ▼
Evidence Collected
        │
        ▼
Tests and Reviews Executed
        │
        ▼
Findings Raised
        │
        ├── Clarification
        ├── Additional Evidence
        ├── Remediation
        ├── Exception
        └── Challenge
        │
        ▼
Assessment Review
        │
        ▼
Conformance Outcome
        │
        ├── Assurance
        ├── Certification Decision
        ├── Runtime Admission Input
        └── Publication Input
        │
        ▼
Monitoring, Surveillance and Closure

27.10.2. Assessment Request

Every Assessment Request SHALL possess:

Request Identifier;
requester;
sponsor;
subject;
assessment purpose;
proposed scope;
proposed Baseline;
proposed Profile;
requested outcome;
target date;
confidentiality;
authority;
provenance.

27.10.3. Request Admission

Admission SHALL determine whether:

subject is identifiable;
purpose is valid;
Baseline exists;
Profile exists or may be governed;
authority exists;
assessor capacity exists;
independence can be satisfied;
conflicts are manageable;
evidence can be accessed.

Admission SHALL not imply conformance.

27.10.4. Assessment Engagement

An Assessment Engagement SHALL identify:

engagement owner;
assessed party;
assessor;
subject;
scope;
criteria;
deliverables;
schedule;
confidentiality;
independence;
limitations;
fees or commercial terms where applicable;
provenance.

Commercial terms SHALL not alter criteria or outcomes.

27.10.5. Scope Definition

Scope SHALL identify:

included Units of Assessment;
excluded Units;
Baseline;
Profiles;
jurisdictions;
tenants;
white-label deployments;
Modules;
Components;
Extensions;
environments;
periods;
Publications;
dependencies.

27.10.6. Assessment Plan

Every formal Assessment Plan SHALL possess:

Plan Identifier;
engagement;
subject and Snapshot strategy;
Profiles;
applicability strategy;
requirement inventory;
assessment methods;
Test Specifications;
evidence plan;
sampling plan;
reviewer assignments;
independence controls;
materiality;
schedule;
communication;
escalation;
outcome method;
provenance.

27.10.7. Assessment Method Classes

Methods MAY include:

inspection;
inquiry;
observation;
confirmation;
reperformance;
recalculation;
automated test;
static analysis;
dynamic analysis;
simulation;
replay;
sampling;
reconciliation;
penetration or security testing;
tenant-isolation testing;
document review;
code review;
graph analysis;
workflow analysis.

27.10.8. Assessment Method Selection

Method selection SHALL consider:

criterion type;
subject criticality;
evidence availability;
automation;
judgement;
period;
independence;
reproducibility;
risk.

27.10.9. Assessment Team

The Team SHALL identify:

Lead Assessor;
domain assessors;
technical assessors;
security assessors;
tenant-isolation assessors;
Publication assessors;
independent reviewers;
evidence custodians;
observers where permitted.

27.10.10. Competence Matrix

A Competence Matrix SHOULD map:

criteria;
required competence;
assigned assessor;
qualification or experience basis;
independence;
limitations;
provenance.

27.10.11. Assessment Readiness

Readiness SHALL evaluate:

subject Snapshot;
Profile;
applicability;
evidence access;
test environment;
tenant isolation;
assessor authority;
independence;
schedule;
legal permissions;
provenance.

27.10.12. Assessment Freeze

The assessment SHALL freeze:

subject Snapshot;
profile versions;
requirement inventory;
assessment period;
Test Specifications;
materiality;
outcome rules.

Material change SHALL trigger impact analysis and Plan update.

27.10.13. Evidence Request

Every Evidence Request SHALL identify:

requested Evidence Class;
requirement or criterion;
subject;
period;
format;
authority;
due time;
confidentiality;
provenance.

27.10.14. Evidence Submission

Submission SHALL preserve:

request;
submitted Evidence Objects;
submitter;
time;
completeness;
limitations;
provenance.

27.10.15. Evidence Acceptance

Acceptance determines whether evidence is usable.

It SHALL not determine the criterion result.

27.10.16. Assessment Activity

Every material Activity SHALL possess:

Activity Identifier;
Plan;
method;
subject;
criterion;
assessor;
executing Component;
start and end time;
evidence;
result;
limitations;
provenance.

27.10.17. Test Environment

The environment SHALL identify:

Baseline;
Runtime Bundle;
Runtime Manifest;
Extension Set;
Modules;
Components;
configuration;
tenant;
data class;
isolation;
external dependencies;
time;
provenance.

27.10.18. Production Assessment

Assessment in production SHALL define:

authority;
read and write permissions;
side-effect controls;
tenant protection;
performance limits;
incident path;
rollback;
provenance.

27.10.19. Non-Production Assessment

Non-production results SHALL identify limitations in representing production state.

27.10.20. Replay Assessment

Replay SHALL identify:

replay mode;
historical Baseline;
Runtime Bundle;
inputs;
isolation;
divergence;
limitations;
provenance.

27.10.21. Finding Communication

Findings SHOULD be communicated with:

criterion;
evidence;
observed state;
severity;
materiality;
response deadline;
remediation expectations;
challenge path.

27.10.22. Assessed-Party Response

A response SHALL preserve:

Finding;
agreement or disagreement;
evidence;
root cause;
remediation;
requested reclassification;
time;
provenance.

27.10.23. Finding Challenge

A challenge SHALL identify:

Finding;
challenger;
grounds;
evidence;
requested change;
reviewer;
decision;
provenance.

27.10.24. Additional Evidence

Additional evidence SHALL be linked to:

original request or Finding;
acquisition time;
effect on assessment;
reassessment;
provenance.

27.10.25. Remediation During Assessment

Remediation MAY occur before final Outcome where the profile permits.

The assessment SHALL preserve:

pre-remediation state;
remediation;
post-remediation state;
validation;
whether operating-effectiveness period remains sufficient.

27.10.26. Assessment Review

Review SHALL evaluate:

scope;
applicability;
evidence;
tests;
Findings;
severity;
exceptions;
judgement;
outcome derivation;
limitations;
provenance.

27.10.27. Independent Review

An independent review SHALL be required where the profile or Scheme requires.

27.10.28. Outcome Decision

Outcome Decision SHALL identify:

assessed subject;
Snapshot;
applicable requirements;
Findings;
unresolved matters;
outcome rules;
decision authority;
decision;
conditions;
validity;
provenance.

27.10.29. Assessment States

States MAY include:

Requested;
Admitted;
Planning;
Ready;
Evidence Collection;
Testing;
Findings Review;
Remediation;
Outcome Review;
Completed;
Completed with Conditions;
Suspended;
Cancelled;
Superseded;
Reopened;
Archived.

27.10.30. Assessment Suspension

Suspension MAY occur due to:

subject change;
evidence integrity concern;
assessor conflict;
tenant-isolation risk;
security incident;
invalid Profile;
invalid Baseline;
unavailable authority;
prohibited interference.

27.10.31. Assessment Cancellation

Cancellation SHALL preserve:

reason;
completed activities;
evidence;
Findings;
claim restrictions;
authority;
provenance.

A cancelled assessment SHALL not yield a conformant Outcome unless the profile explicitly permits a bounded partial result.

27.10.32. Assessment Reopening

Reopening MAY be triggered by:

new evidence;
corrected evidence;
material subject change;
challenge;
incident;
certification review;
regulator request;
detected error.

27.10.33. Assessment Completion

Completion SHALL require:

scope evaluated;
applicable criteria treated;
evidence gaps recorded;
Findings finalised;
review complete;
Outcome issued or inability to conclude recorded;
provenance complete.

27.10.34. Assessment Closure

Closure SHALL additionally require:

deliverables issued;
Findings assigned;
evidence archived;
surveillance or follow-up assigned;
claims controlled;
access reviewed;
provenance complete.

27.10.35. Assessment Receipt

An Assessment Receipt SHOULD contain:

Request;
Engagement;
subject;
Snapshot;
Baseline;
Profiles;
scope;
methods;
evidence inventory;
Findings;
review;
Outcome;
validity;
provenance.

27.10.36. Lifecycle Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

Request;
admission;
Engagement;
scope;
Plan;
freeze;
activities;
assessor authority;
independence;
review;
Outcome;
suspension;
closure;
provenance.

27.11. Certification Foundations and Scheme Architecture

Certification is the formal decision that an identified subject satisfies the requirements of an approved Certification Scheme for a defined scope and validity period.

Certification SHALL be based on a valid conformance assessment but SHALL remain a separate decision.

27.11.1. Certification Scheme Identity

Every Certification Scheme SHALL possess:

Scheme Identifier;
canonical name;
Scheme Owner;
authority;
certification subjects;
eligible applicants;
source Baselines;
Conformance Profiles;
assessment requirements;
competence requirements;
independence requirements;
decision rules;
certificate rules;
validity;
surveillance;
suspension;
withdrawal;
recertification;
appeals;
public claims;
lifecycle;
version;
provenance.

27.11.2. Scheme Types

Scheme Types MAY include:

Core Baseline Certification Scheme;
Runtime Bundle Certification Scheme;
Module Certification Scheme;
Component Certification Scheme;
Extension Certification Scheme;
White-Label Certification Scheme;
Tenant Certification Scheme;
Organisation Certification Scheme;
Publication-System Certification Scheme;
Security Certification Scheme;
Tenant-Isolation Certification Scheme;
Migration Certification Scheme;
Historical-Trust Certification Scheme;
Certification-Body Certification Scheme.

27.11.3. Scheme Authority

A Scheme SHALL identify the authority that may:

establish the Scheme;
approve Scheme changes;
recognise assessment bodies;
make certification decisions;
issue Certificates;
suspend or withdraw certification;
hear appeals;
publish status.

27.11.4. Scheme Requirement Set

The Scheme SHALL identify:

mandatory Profiles;
optional Profiles;
requirement versions;
severity policy;
exception policy;
evidence requirements;
assessment period;
outcome thresholds;
validity period;
surveillance requirements.

27.11.5. Scheme Scope

Scope SHALL identify:

subject classes;
Baselines;
jurisdictions;
tenants;
white-label deployments;
Modules;
Components;
Extensions;
Runtime environments;
Publication classes;
exclusions.

27.11.6. Scheme Applicant

An applicant SHALL possess:

Applicant Identifier;
legal or organisational identity;
tenant or white-label identity where applicable;
subject ownership or authorisation;
contact;
declarations;
conflicts;
provenance.

27.11.7. Certification Application

Every application SHALL identify:

Scheme;
applicant;
subject;
subject Snapshot strategy;
requested scope;
requested claims;
existing certification;
external certifications;
known Findings;
declarations;
authority;
provenance.

27.11.8. Certification Assessment

The certification assessment SHALL follow the applicable Conformance Profiles and Scheme requirements.

27.11.9. Certification Review

Certification Review SHALL be independent of assessment execution where required.

It SHALL evaluate:

applicant eligibility;
subject identity;
assessment validity;
evidence sufficiency;
Findings;
exceptions;
conditions;
surveillance readiness;
claims;
provenance.

27.11.10. Certification Decision Authority

The Decision Maker SHALL possess valid authority, competence and independence.

27.11.11. Certification Decision

Every Certification Decision SHALL possess:

Decision Identifier;
Scheme;
applicant;
subject;
Subject Snapshot;
Baseline;
Conformance Outcome;
review;
scope;
conditions;
exclusions;
validity;
surveillance;
decision;
decision maker;
authority;
time;
signature;
provenance.

27.11.12. Certification Decision Classes

Decision Classes MAY include:

Grant;
Grant with Conditions;
Grant Restricted Scope;
Defer;
Require Additional Assessment;
Reject;
Maintain;
Reduce Scope;
Suspend;
Withdraw;
Renew;
Expire.

27.11.13. Certification Eligibility

Certification SHALL require:

valid Scheme;
eligible subject;
valid assessment;
acceptable Conformance Outcome;
no unresolved certification-blocking Finding;
valid exceptions;
valid decision authority;
defined surveillance;
claim controls;
provenance.

27.11.14. Conditional Certification

Conditions SHALL identify:

condition;
owner;
due time;
surveillance;
public disclosure;
failure consequence;
provenance.

27.11.15. Restricted-Scope Certification

Restricted scope SHALL identify:

included scope;
excluded scope;
non-certified dependencies;
permitted claims;
verification;
provenance.

27.11.16. Certificate Identity

Every Certificate SHALL possess:

Certificate Identifier;
Scheme;
Certification Decision;
certified subject;
Subject Snapshot or version;
Baseline;
scope;
status;
issue time;
effective time;
expiration;
conditions;
exclusions;
certification body;
signature;
verification reference;
provenance.

27.11.17. Certificate Status

Status MAY include:

Active;
Active with Conditions;
Restricted;
Surveillance Due;
Suspended;
Expired;
Withdrawn;
Superseded;
Invalid;
Historical.

27.11.18. Certificate Immutability

An issued Certificate SHALL remain immutable.

Status change SHALL create a new governed status record.

27.11.19. Certification Claim

A claim SHALL identify:

certified subject;
Scheme;
Certificate Identifier;
certified scope;
status;
validity;
limitations;
verification reference.

27.11.20. Prohibited Certification Claims

A Certificate SHALL not be used to claim:

universal legal compliance;
universal framework compliance;
absence of all defects;
future conformance;
conformance outside scope;
conformance of an unassessed version;
certification of dependencies not included;
accreditation where none exists;
regulatory approval where none exists.

27.11.21. Certification Mark

A certification mark or badge SHALL bind to:

Scheme;
Certificate;
status;
scope;
usage rules;
verification;
withdrawal controls.

A static image without verification SHALL not be sufficient for a high-assurance public claim.

27.11.22. Certification Validity

Validity SHALL depend on:

subject stability;
Baseline;
Profile;
evidence period;
surveillance;
incidents;
changes;
conditions;
certification-body authority.

27.11.23. Material Change Notification

The certified party SHALL notify the certification body of material changes including:

subject version;
Baseline;
Runtime Bundle;
Runtime Manifest;
Extension Set;
Module or Component change;
security incident;
tenant-isolation incident;
ownership change;
Publication change;
certification-scope change.

27.11.24. Surveillance Foundation

A Scheme SHALL define whether surveillance is:

continuous;
periodic;
event-triggered;
risk-based;
change-triggered;
incident-triggered.

27.11.25. Certification Suspension Foundation

Suspension MAY be triggered by:

overdue condition;
failed surveillance;
critical Finding;
evidence integrity concern;
authority issue;
subject change;
Baseline change;
incident;
misleading claim;
non-payment only where Scheme governance lawfully permits and does not misrepresent conformance state.

27.11.26. Certification Withdrawal Foundation

Withdrawal MAY be triggered by:

persistent non-conformance;
invalid assessment;
falsified evidence;
compromised authority;
prohibited claim;
subject retirement;
applicant request;
Scheme retirement;
failure to resolve suspension.

27.11.27. Recertification Foundation

Recertification SHALL define:

trigger;
scope;
new Snapshot;
current Baseline;
current Profile;
prior Findings;
change impact;
assessment;
decision;
provenance.

27.11.28. Scheme Change

A Scheme change SHALL evaluate:

existing Certificates;
transition;
grandfathering;
surveillance;
public claims;
certification bodies;
assessors;
applicants;
provenance.

A Core Scheme requirement change SHALL follow Constitutional Evolution where it changes Core meaning.

27.11.29. Scheme Lifecycle

Lifecycle MAY include:

Draft;
Review;
Approved;
Active;
Active with Conditions;
Deprecated;
New-Application Prohibited;
Superseded;
Suspended;
Withdrawn;
Retired;
Historical Only.

27.11.30. Scheme Registry

The Certification Scheme Registry SHALL preserve:

Scheme identities;
versions;
owners;
authority;
Profiles;
assessment rules;
decision rules;
recognised bodies;
lifecycle;
supersession;
provenance.

27.11.31. Certificate Registry

The Certificate Registry SHALL preserve:

Certificate identities;
subjects;
Schemes;
scope;
status;
validity;
conditions;
suspensions;
withdrawals;
signatures;
provenance.

27.11.32. Certification Receipt

A receipt SHOULD contain:

Scheme;
application;
subject;
assessment;
Conformance Outcome;
review;
Decision;
Certificate;
scope;
validity;
surveillance;
signature;
provenance.

27.11.33. Certification Validation

HECATE SHALL validate:

Scheme identity;
authority;
application;
assessment binding;
review;
decision authority;
eligibility;
Certificate;
status;
claim;
validity;
provenance.

HECATE SHALL not create certification authority or represent validation as certification.

27.12. Runtime Integration, Provenance and Part I Conformance

The CCCF SHALL integrate with constitutional compilation, Runtime resolution, validation, Extensions, Publication, evolution, Pergamum Pulse, archival and public verification without collapsing authority boundaries.

27.12.1. Constitutional Compiler Integration

The Constitutional Compiler SHOULD transform ratified requirements and Profiles into governed artefacts including:

Requirement Registry entries;
Control Objective definitions;
Criterion definitions;
Test Specifications;
schema validators;
graph validators;
policy test suites;
decision test vectors;
computation test vectors;
workflow test fixtures;
event contract tests;
Agent Profile tests;
tool contract tests;
Module conformance manifests;
Component conformance manifests;
Extension conformance manifests;
evidence schemas;
Finding schemas;
outcome rules;
certification data schemas;
public-verification schemas.

27.12.2. Compiler Source Binding

Compiler outputs SHALL bind to:

Constitutional Baseline;
source requirements;
source Profiles;
compiler version;
build profile;
output digest;
provenance.

27.12.3. Compiler Non-Authority

The Constitutional Compiler SHALL NOT:

create new conformance requirements;
weaken source requirements;
decide applicability where unresolved judgement is required;
waive a requirement;
certify a subject;
accredit a body;
claim assurance independence.

27.12.4. HECATE Integration

HECATE MAY:

validate conformance objects;
execute objective criteria;
validate Profiles;
validate evidence structure and integrity;
validate Test Executions;
derive objective Findings;
enforce Assessment Gates;
validate Outcome derivation;
validate Scheme and Certificate structures;
validate status and validity;
produce receipts.

HECATE SHALL NOT:

create constitutional requirements;
create missing evidence;
accept residual risk without authority;
resolve material legal ambiguity;
certify itself;
substitute validation for assurance or certification.

27.12.5. CRP Integration

CRP SHALL resolve:

applicable Constitutional Baseline;
applicable Core requirements;
applicable Conformance Profiles;
tenant and white-label scope;
Module and Component context;
Extension context;
Runtime context;
effective time.

27.12.6. Runtime Admission Integration

Runtime Admission MAY require:

Conformance Outcome;
valid Certificate;
specific critical criteria;
no blocking Finding;
valid evidence freshness;
valid Runtime Manifest;
valid Extension Set;
tenant-isolation evidence;
security evidence.

The exact admission rule SHALL be explicit.

27.12.7. Runtime Manifest Integration

The Runtime Manifest SHOULD identify:

active Baseline;
Runtime Bundle;
Module versions;
Component versions;
Extension Set;
applicable conformance Profiles;
current critical Outcomes;
certification status where relevant;
exceptions;
drift state;
provenance.

27.12.8. Module Integration

Every Module SHOULD expose:

Module conformance profile;
Component inventory;
capability inventory;
required Controls;
evidence interfaces;
test interfaces;
current Findings;
current Outcomes;
provenance.

27.12.9. Component Integration

Every material Component SHOULD expose:

Component identity;
owning Module;
version;
contract;
configuration;
health;
evidence;
test hooks;
current conformance state;
provenance.

27.12.10. Extension Framework Integration

The CCCF SHALL assess Extensions against:

Extension Point;
Namespace;
Package;
Manifest;
dependency lock;
Core Baseline;
tenant scope;
Module and Component integration;
security;
Publication impact;
lifecycle.

27.12.11. Evolution Framework Integration

Constitutional Evolution SHALL govern changes to:

Core requirements;
mandatory Core Profiles;
Protected conformance principles;
certification foundations;
authority boundaries;
Module and Component obligations.

The CCCF SHALL impact-analyse active assessments and Certificates after change.

27.12.12. Publication Framework Integration

The CPF SHALL govern release of:

assessment reports;
Conformance Outcomes;
assurance conclusions;
Certificates;
certification marks;
surveillance status;
suspension;
withdrawal;
public verification records.

27.12.13. Publication Claim Binding

Every public claim SHALL bind to:

Outcome or Certificate;
subject;
scope;
status;
validity;
limitations;
verification reference;
Publication Release;
provenance.

27.12.14. Evidence API

A governed Evidence API MAY expose:

evidence metadata;
integrity;
scope;
classification;
freshness;
relationships;
controlled access;
provenance.

It SHALL not expose protected content without authority.

27.12.15. Conformance API

A governed Conformance API MAY expose:

subject;
Profile;
applicable requirements;
Outcome;
Findings at permitted disclosure level;
conditions;
validity;
status;
verification;
provenance.

27.12.16. Certification API

A governed Certification API MAY expose:

Scheme;
Certificate Identifier;
subject;
scope;
status;
issue and expiration;
suspension or withdrawal;
signature verification;
public provenance.

27.12.17. Event Integration

Events MAY include:

AssessmentRequested;
AssessmentAdmitted;
AssessmentPlanApproved;
SubjectSnapshotFrozen;
EvidenceRequested;
EvidenceSubmitted;
TestExecuted;
FindingRaised;
FindingReclassified;
ExceptionApproved;
RemediationValidated;
ConformanceOutcomeIssued;
CertificationAppliedFor;
CertificationGranted;
CertificationConditionDue;
CertificationSuspended;
CertificationWithdrawn;
CertificationRenewed;
ConformanceClaimPublished.

27.12.18. Workflow Integration

Workflow Runtime MAY coordinate:

assessment intake;
scope approval;
evidence collection;
test execution;
Finding review;
remediation;
Outcome review;
certification review;
surveillance;
suspension;
withdrawal;
appeal;
Publication.

Workflow completion SHALL not itself establish conformance or certification.

27.12.19. Security Integration

Security Runtime SHALL enforce:

assessor access;
evidence access;
tenant isolation;
signing keys;
certification credentials;
public-verification integrity;
revocation;
audit logging;
archive access.

27.12.20. Temporal Integration

Temporal Runtime SHALL govern:

requirement effective time;
Profile effective time;
evidence time;
assessment period;
Outcome issue and validity;
condition deadlines;
Certificate issue and expiration;
suspension;
withdrawal;
historical resolution.

27.12.21. Archive Integration

The archive SHALL preserve:

requirements;
Profiles;
Subject Snapshots;
Plans;
Evidence Objects;
Test Executions;
Findings;
exceptions;
remediation;
Outcomes;
assurance;
certification decisions;
Certificates;
status history;
Publications;
provenance.

27.12.22. Historical Reconstruction

Historical reconstruction SHALL identify:

applicable Baseline;
applicable Profile;
applicable requirements;
subject Snapshot;
evidence available;
tests executed;
Findings;
Outcome;
certification status;
Runtime state;
Module and Component lineage;
later correction, suspension or withdrawal;
provenance.

27.12.23. Assessment Replay

Assessment Replay MAY reproduce:

Profile resolution;
applicability;
objective tests;
evidence validation;
outcome rules;
Certificate verification.

Replay SHALL not create a new certification decision without valid authority.

27.12.24. Conformance Drift

Conformance Drift exists where current subject state differs materially from the assessed Snapshot or certified scope.

Drift MAY include:

Baseline change;
Profile change;
Runtime Bundle change;
Runtime Manifest change;
Extension Set change;
Module change;
Component change;
policy change;
configuration change;
model change;
evidence expiry;
incident;
tenant-scope change.

27.12.25. Drift Response

Drift MAY trigger:

warning;
partial reassessment;
full reassessment;
surveillance;
Runtime hold;
Certificate condition;
suspension;
withdrawal;
Publication correction.

27.12.26. Pergamum Pulse Integration

Pergamum Pulse MAY derive intelligence including:

requirement coverage gaps;
control concentration;
common-control dependency risk;
evidence freshness risk;
Finding recurrence;
systemic non-conformity;
exception ageing;
remediation backlog;
certification concentration;
assessor bottlenecks;
surveillance risk;
conformance drift;
tenant divergence;
white-label divergence;
Extension non-conformance clusters;
Module-level conformance risk;
Component-level conformance risk;
public-claim inconsistency;
historical-verification gaps.

Pergamum Pulse SHALL preserve:

Requirement lineage;
Profile lineage;
subject lineage;
Snapshot lineage;
evidence lineage;
test lineage;
Finding lineage;
Outcome lineage;
certification lineage;
Module lineage;
Component lineage;
Extension lineage;
tenant lineage;
white-label lineage;
Publication lineage;
temporal validity;
provenance.

Derived intelligence SHALL remain Intelligence Layer assertions until governed activation.

27.12.27. Part I Provenance

Part I provenance SHALL connect:

Constitutional Baseline;
Requirement Source;
Conformance Requirement;
Control Objective;
Control;
Criterion;
Test Specification;
Evidence Requirement;
Conformance Profile;
Applicability Decision;
Conformance Subject;
Subject Snapshot;
Assessment Request;
Assessment Plan;
Assessment Activity;
Test Execution;
Evidence Object;
Finding;
Exception;
Compensating Control;
Remediation;
Conformance Outcome;
Certification Scheme;
Certification Application;
Certification Decision;
Certificate;
Runtime Manifest;
Module;
Component;
Extension;
Publication;
archive;
provenance.

27.12.28. Part I Provenance Graph

Constitutional Baseline
        │
        ▼
Requirement Source and Conformance Requirement
        │
        ├── Control Objective
        │       └── Control
        │
        ├── Criterion
        │       └── Test Specification
        │
        └── Evidence Requirement
        │
        ▼
Conformance Profile and Applicability
        │
        ▼
Conformance Subject and Subject Snapshot
        │
        ▼
Assessment Request and Assessment Plan
        │
        ▼
Evidence and Test Execution
        │
        ▼
Findings, Exceptions and Remediation
        │
        ▼
Conformance Outcome
        │
        ├── Runtime Admission Input
        ├── Assurance Input
        ├── Certification Decision
        └── Publication Input
        │
        ▼
Monitoring, Drift, Archive and Historical Verification

27.12.29. Provenance Completeness

Provenance completeness MAY be:

Complete;
Complete with Controlled Redaction;
Materially Complete;
Partially Complete;
Materially Incomplete;
Reconstructed;
Disputed;
Unavailable.

Materially incomplete provenance SHALL prevent:

unqualified Conformant Outcomes;
unqualified certification;
unqualified independent-assurance claims;
unexplained Runtime Admission;
misleading public claims.

27.12.30. Controlled Redaction

Redaction SHALL preserve:

redacted object identity;
reason;
authority;
scope;
audience;
effect on assessment or verification;
controlled-access path;
integrity of remaining provenance.

27.12.31. Part I Conformance Suite

The Constitutional Compiler Framework SHOULD generate fixtures including:

valid Conformance Subject;
ambiguous subject identity;
valid Subject Snapshot;
changed subject after freeze;
valid Requirement Source;
requirement with lost source authority;
valid requirement decomposition;
incomplete requirement decomposition;
Control Objective with multiple Controls;
automated Control;
manual Control;
invalid common-Control inheritance;
objective Criterion;
judgement Criterion;
conditional Criterion;
valid Profile composition;
lower-layer Profile weakening Core;
Applicability Decision;
invalid Not Applicable decision;
time-limited exemption;
expired exemption;
valid Evidence Object;
stale evidence;
cross-tenant evidence leakage;
conflicting evidence;
valid sampling plan;
Test Execution error treated incorrectly as pass;
minor Finding;
critical tenant-isolation Finding;
systemic Finding;
valid Compensating Control;
inadequate compensating equivalence;
Remediation validation;
Conformant Outcome;
Conformant with Conditions;
Partially Conformant;
Indeterminate Outcome;
valid Assessment Plan;
assessor conflict of interest;
insufficient competence;
production assessment with side-effect controls;
cancelled assessment;
valid Certification Scheme;
invalid certification authority;
restricted-scope Certificate;
misleading certification claim;
Certificate status suspension;
certification mark verification;
Runtime Admission using exact Outcome;
conformance drift;
assessment replay;
complete Part I provenance.

Part I Conformance

An implementation conforms to Part I of the Core Conformance and Certification Framework where it:

distinguishes validation, assessment, conformance, assurance, certification, accreditation, approval, Runtime Admission, Publication eligibility, audit, attestation and licence;
binds every formal conformance claim to an exact subject, Snapshot, Baseline, Profile, scope, period, evidence set, Outcome and provenance;
prevents deployment success, absence of known defects, implementation similarity or popularity from being represented as conformance;
prevents certification from being represented as constitutional authority or universal legal compliance;
identifies precise Units of Assessment for artefacts, Runtime Bundles, Modules, Components, Extensions, tenants, white-label deployments, organisations and Publications;
preserves assessment boundaries, exclusions, dependencies and shared responsibilities;
prevents transitive or inherited conformance without governed scope and evidence;
represents requirements, Control Objectives, Controls, criteria, Tests, evidence, Findings, Outcomes and Certificates as distinct objects;
preserves requirement source authority and version;
prevents requirement decomposition from weakening or omitting source meaning;
distinguishes Control design effectiveness from operating effectiveness;
preserves automated Control ownership by both Module and Component;
supports objective, judgement, quantitative, qualitative, conditional and compound criteria;
preserves explicit requirement-to-Control-to-Test-to-evidence mappings;
uses versioned Conformance Profiles to assemble applicable requirements without silently rewriting them;
prevents lower profile layers from weakening non-overrideable Core requirements;
resolves applicability through explicit context and decisions;
distinguishes Not Applicable, Exempt, Deferred, Grandfathered, Unable to Determine and Not Evaluated;
prevents Unable to Determine or Not Evaluated from being represented as Conformant;
preserves Evidence identity, authority, integrity, freshness, classification, tenant scope and chain of custody;
labels derived and AI-generated evidence analysis as non-authoritative until governed review;
governs sampling and discloses inference limitations;
distinguishes Pass, Fail, Error, Blocked, Not Executed and Indeterminate test results;
records Findings with criterion, evidence, severity, materiality, confidence, affected scope and provenance;
governs exceptions, compensating Controls, residual risk and expiration;
prohibits exceptions from waiving non-exceptionable invariants or concealing tenant leakage;
preserves remediation, validation and Finding closure;
determines Outcomes through governed rules and preserves unresolved Findings and limitations;
distinguishes Conformant, Conformant with Conditions, Partially Conformant, Non-Conformant, Indeterminate and Not Evaluated;
prevents aggregate Outcomes from concealing non-conformant critical constituents;
governs assessments through Request, admission, scope, Plan, freeze, evidence, testing, review, Outcome and closure;
assigns competent assessors and enforces required independence;
preserves pre-remediation and post-remediation state where remediation occurs during assessment;
distinguishes assessment completion from certification decision;
governs Certification Schemes through exact scope, Profiles, evidence, decision rules, validity, surveillance, suspension and withdrawal;
requires valid, competent and independent Certification Decision Authority where applicable;
binds Certificates to exact subject, Snapshot or version, Baseline, scope, validity, conditions, Scheme and Decision;
prevents misleading certification marks or claims;
preserves Certificate status changes without mutating issued Certificates;
integrates the Constitutional Compiler without granting it requirement or certification authority;
integrates HECATE without treating validation as certification or assurance;
integrates CRP for exact Baseline, Profile and applicability resolution;
integrates Runtime Admission without making certification an automatic admission decision;
integrates CPF for governed release and correction of conformance and certification claims;
detects conformance drift across Baselines, Runtime Bundles, Runtime Manifests, Extensions, Modules, Components, models, configurations and evidence;
preserves both Module and Component lineage;
integrates Pergamum Pulse without granting it conformance, exception, risk-acceptance or certification authority;
supports archive, historical reconstruction and assessment replay;
preserves complete Part I provenance;
provides conformance fixtures covering subjects, requirements, Profiles, applicability, evidence, Findings, Outcomes, assessment, certification and Runtime integration.

Part I Foundational Principle

Conformance is a bounded, evidence-backed and historically reconstructable statement about an exact subject under an exact requirement set.

Every Core conformance claim SHALL identify the Constitutional Baseline, Conformance Profile, applicability context, Subject Snapshot, Modules, Components, Extensions, tenants, evidence, tests, Findings, exceptions, conditions, validity and provenance that support it. Unknown, Indeterminate and Not Evaluated SHALL never be promoted into Conformant through omission, aggregation, automation or presentation.

Certification SHALL remain a separate, scheme-bound decision made by valid authority. HECATE may validate. The Constitutional Compiler may generate tests. CRP may resolve applicability. Modules and Components may expose evidence. Pergamum Pulse may identify risk. None of them may create missing evidence, waive constitutional requirements, claim independence or certify without explicit authority.

By making conformance subject-exact, requirement-traceable, profile-resolved, evidence-governed, tenant-isolated, authority-separated, certification-bounded and historically verifiable, ZAYAZ can support regulator-grade trust without inflating technical validation into claims the evidence cannot sustain.

GitHub Repo Request for Change (RFC)

Part I — Conformance Foundations and Architecture​

27.1. Purpose​

27.1.1. Governing Question​

27.1.2. Relationship to Other Constitutional Frameworks​

27.1.3. Core Conformance Boundary​

27.1.4. Conformance Is Not Implementation Similarity​

27.1.5. Conformance Is Not Deployment Success​

27.1.6. Conformance Is Not Absence of Known Defects​

27.1.7. Conformance Is Not Legal Advice​

27.1.8. Certification Is Not Constitutional Authority​

27.1.9. Conformance Is Not Assurance​

27.1.10. Conformance Is Not Runtime Admission​

27.1.11. Conformance Is Not Publication Eligibility​

27.1.12. Conformance Is Not Accreditation​

27.2. Scope and Applicability​

27.2.1. In-Scope Conformance Subjects​

27.2.2. In-Scope Claim Types​

27.2.3. In-Scope Assessment Modes​

27.2.4. Out-of-Scope Claims​

27.2.5. Applicability Trigger​

27.2.6. Claim Precision​

27.2.7. Multi-Subject Assessment​

27.2.8. Composite System Assessment​

27.2.9. Inherited Conformance​

27.2.10. Transitive Conformance Prohibition​

27.2.11. External Certification Recognition​

27.2.12. Historical Applicability​

27.3. Foundational Conformance Principles​

27.3.1. Exact Subject Principle​

27.3.2. Exact Requirement Principle​

27.3.3. Exact Baseline Principle​

27.3.4. Applicability Before Testing​

27.3.5. Evidence Before Claim​

27.3.6. Outcome Boundedness​

27.3.7. No Silent Assumptions​

27.3.8. No Silent Exceptions​

27.3.9. No Silent Compensating Controls​

27.3.10. No Binary Inflation​

27.3.11. Unknown Is Not Conformant​

27.3.12. Version Integrity​

27.3.13. Temporal Integrity​

27.3.14. Tenant Integrity​

27.3.15. Independence Integrity​

27.3.16. Competence Integrity​

27.3.17. Reproducibility​

27.3.18. Explainability​

27.3.19. Historical Immutability​

27.3.20. Certification Conservatism​

27.3.21. No Self-Certifying Agent​

27.3.22. Module and Component Lineage​

27.3.23. Publication Honesty​

27.3.24. Challengeability​

27.4. Conformance Domain Model​

27.4.1. Core Conformance Objects​

27.4.2. Conformance Subject​

27.4.3. Subject Snapshot​

27.4.4. Requirement Source​

27.4.5. Conformance Requirement​

27.4.6. Control Objective​

27.4.7. Control​

27.4.8. Criterion​

27.4.9. Test Specification​

27.4.10. Evidence Requirement​

27.4.11. Finding​

27.4.12. Conformance Outcome​

27.4.13. Certification Scheme​

27.4.14. Certificate​

27.4.15. Conformance Graph​

27.4.16. Domain Object Identity​

27.4.17. Object Separation​

27.4.18. Domain Registry​

27.4.19. Domain Validation​

27.5. Conformance Architecture and Authority Boundaries​

27.5.1. Conformance Architecture Layers​

27.5.2. Constitutional Requirement Layer​

27.5.3. Conformance Definition Layer​

27.5.4. Profile and Applicability Layer​

27.5.5. Assessment Planning Layer​

27.5.6. Evidence Layer​

27.5.7. Validation and Test Layer​

Part I — Conformance Foundations and Architecture

27.1. Purpose

27.1.1. Governing Question

27.1.2. Relationship to Other Constitutional Frameworks

27.1.3. Core Conformance Boundary

27.1.4. Conformance Is Not Implementation Similarity

27.1.5. Conformance Is Not Deployment Success

27.1.6. Conformance Is Not Absence of Known Defects

27.1.7. Conformance Is Not Legal Advice

27.1.8. Certification Is Not Constitutional Authority

27.1.9. Conformance Is Not Assurance

27.1.10. Conformance Is Not Runtime Admission

27.1.11. Conformance Is Not Publication Eligibility

27.1.12. Conformance Is Not Accreditation

27.2. Scope and Applicability

27.2.1. In-Scope Conformance Subjects

27.2.2. In-Scope Claim Types

27.2.3. In-Scope Assessment Modes

27.2.4. Out-of-Scope Claims

27.2.5. Applicability Trigger

27.2.6. Claim Precision

27.2.7. Multi-Subject Assessment

27.2.8. Composite System Assessment

27.2.9. Inherited Conformance

27.2.10. Transitive Conformance Prohibition

27.2.11. External Certification Recognition

27.2.12. Historical Applicability

27.3. Foundational Conformance Principles

27.3.1. Exact Subject Principle

27.3.2. Exact Requirement Principle

27.3.3. Exact Baseline Principle

27.3.4. Applicability Before Testing

27.3.5. Evidence Before Claim

27.3.6. Outcome Boundedness

27.3.7. No Silent Assumptions

27.3.8. No Silent Exceptions

27.3.9. No Silent Compensating Controls

27.3.10. No Binary Inflation

27.3.11. Unknown Is Not Conformant

27.3.12. Version Integrity

27.3.13. Temporal Integrity

27.3.14. Tenant Integrity

27.3.15. Independence Integrity

27.3.16. Competence Integrity

27.3.17. Reproducibility

27.3.18. Explainability

27.3.19. Historical Immutability

27.3.20. Certification Conservatism

27.3.21. No Self-Certifying Agent

27.3.22. Module and Component Lineage

27.3.23. Publication Honesty

27.3.24. Challengeability

27.4. Conformance Domain Model

27.4.1. Core Conformance Objects

27.4.2. Conformance Subject

27.4.3. Subject Snapshot

27.4.4. Requirement Source

27.4.5. Conformance Requirement

27.4.6. Control Objective

27.4.7. Control

27.4.8. Criterion

27.4.9. Test Specification

27.4.10. Evidence Requirement

27.4.11. Finding

27.4.12. Conformance Outcome

27.4.13. Certification Scheme

27.4.14. Certificate

27.4.15. Conformance Graph

27.4.16. Domain Object Identity

27.4.17. Object Separation

27.4.18. Domain Registry

27.4.19. Domain Validation

27.5. Conformance Architecture and Authority Boundaries

27.5.1. Conformance Architecture Layers

27.5.2. Constitutional Requirement Layer

27.5.3. Conformance Definition Layer

27.5.4. Profile and Applicability Layer

27.5.5. Assessment Planning Layer

27.5.6. Evidence Layer

27.5.7. Validation and Test Layer