Technology

The Arbiter Architecture

Runtime enforcement that produces evidence-grade proof artifacts at every policy decision—not logs that document what already happened.

The Gap

Everyone Else Builds Documentation Tools

❌ What Exists Today

  • Compliance dashboards that track intent
  • Audit checklists completed after the fact
  • Policy documents that aren't machine-readable
  • Access controls that stop at "who can open"
  • Logs that can be modified or deleted
  • Best-effort application behavior

✓ What HARE Provides

  • Mandatory pre-execution authorization
  • Cryptographic evidence at moment of decision
  • Policy-as-code that machines enforce
  • Governance of access and use
  • Immutable artifacts bound to decisions
  • Deterministic enforcement semantics

The Core Difference

They document intent—they don't enforce it. HARE prevents non-compliant operations, not just policy violations.

Our Solution

Arbiter-Mediated Capsule Architecture

A single architectural idea that makes everything else possible: all governed operations must pass through the Arbiter before execution.

🎯

The Arbiter

Singular runtime enforcement authority. Every operation—access, retrieval, transformation, action—requires explicit PERMIT or DENY before proceeding. No bypass paths exist.

📦

Project Capsules

Policy-carrying data containers. Policy is inseparable from data. Lineage tracked across derivations. Revocation without deletion preserves audit continuity.

📝

Evidence Artifacts

Proof and denial artifacts emitted as direct byproducts of enforcement. Cryptographically bound to decision context. Verifiable without trusting mutable logs.

"HARE does not claim that an action was lawful—it produces artifacts that allow others to verify that enforcement occurred as declared."

Enforcement Scope

What HARE Enforces—And What It Doesn't

✓ HARE Enforces

  • Visibility — whether data may be seen or recalled
  • Retrieval — whether data may be supplied to a model
  • Transformation — whether data may be summarized or derived
  • Action — whether downstream actions may proceed
  • Routing — where computation may occur
  • Revocation — whether prior permissions remain valid

❌ HARE Does Not

  • Interpret or decide law
  • Infer human intent
  • Judge ethical correctness
  • Inspect or modify model internals
  • Correct model outputs
  • Replace human oversight or accountability

HARE enforces declared rules under constraint. It does not invent rules, reinterpret them, or soften them. This constraint is intentional and foundational.

Vertical Applications

Built for Regulated Industries

The same Arbiter architecture enforces sector-specific requirements across regulated industries.

HAREMed
Healthcare
✓ HIPAA/GDPR health data compliance
✓ Patient consent enforcement
✓ PHI access tracking
✓ Research data governance
✓ Cross-border health data transfer
HARELaw
Legal Services
✓ Attorney-client privilege protection
✓ Matter-scoped access controls
✓ Privilege leak prevention
✓ Conflict-of-interest enforcement
✓ Cryptographically verifiable audit evidence
HAREFin
Financial Services
✓ SEC/FINRA audit compliance
✓ Regulatory reporting automation
✓ Transaction evidence trails
✓ Client data segregation
✓ Cross-border jurisdiction routing
HAREGov
Government
✓ FOIA partial disclosure
✓ Evidence chain-of-custody
✓ Classification enforcement
✓ Inter-agency data sharing
✓ Public accountability trails
HAREUtil
Utilities
✓ Grid operations governance
✓ Role-based query access
✓ Regulatory filing support
✓ Public records compliance
✓ Infrastructure security boundaries
HAREOffice
Enterprise Foundation
✓ HR policy enforcement
✓ Document access governance
✓ Contract confidentiality
✓ Employee data protection
✓ Cross-department boundaries

Regulatory Alignment

EU AI Act Alignment

HARE mechanisms are designed to align with EU AI Act requirements through technical implementation. Regulatory interpretation and compliance determination remain the responsibility of deployers.

EU AI Act Article Requirement HARE Mechanism
Article 10 Data governance Container-scoped indexes with governed query
Article 11 Technical documentation Retrieval-lineage capsules with chunk hashing
Article 12 Record-keeping Evidence artifacts as byproducts (not logs)
Article 13 Transparency Disclosure-minimized audit bundles
Article 14 Human oversight Intent-scoped elevation with plan visibility
Article 15 Accuracy, security Attestation-gated execution, substrate independence

Explore Collaboration Opportunities

Join , pilot partners, and research organizations building the EU AI Act compliance infrastructure.