Public summary · Canonical detail lives with the product evidence system
Claims discipline
Every CopperCloud receipt is a pair of trust tier (how it was signed) and canonical status (what policy authority applied). Verification must expose both. Neither collapses into a single “valid = approved” stamp.
Trust tiers (summary)
local_unsigned— local structural checks only; not portable proofdeveloper_signed— developer-held key; not institutional authoritysandbox_signed— sandbox orchestrator evidence; demo/PoC onlysoftware_attested— software-identity attestation under an authorised canonical packhardware_attested— requires a verified hardware attestation document
A receipt may never claim a trust tier higher than its canonical status authorises.
Canonical status (summary)
canonical— authorised policy pack suitable for institutional interpretationtenant_canonical— authoritative only inside that tenant’s governance boundarysandbox/developer_local— never institutional evidencedeprecated/revoked— historical interpretation rules apply; not new authority
Universal anti-claims
- A receipt does not prove the workload was correct.
- A receipt does not prove absence of a property the submitter merely declared absent.
- Region labels alone do not prove Zambia residency.
- CPU-side attestation does not prove GPU-side confidential compute.
- A receipt does not prove regulatory compliance; it is evidence input to an institutional process.
- Receipt age or continuity does not increase per-receipt trust strength.
Full operational detail is maintained with the CopperCloud evidence system. Public visitors should start with verification boundaries.