Proof & compliance
Every delivery arrives with enforceable evidence
An engineering factory is meaningless without proof of what it produces. Argy documents every change on your production applications: intent, rule applied, gate passed, human sign-off, and full audit trail.
In a regulated industry, code is not enough: you must answer for it.
When an outside team delivers a change, who can prove months later which instruction was followed, which tests passed and who approved production release? Argy replaces that uncertainty with a structured, verifiable delivery record, generated continuously under the control of your internal engineers, according to the contracted autonomy tier chosen for your scope.
Let us trace how this evidence bundle is constructed during an actual delivery.
Anatomy of the evidence bundle: five inseparable pillars
An auditor does not review a repository by randomly inspecting thousands of code lines: they examine what was requested, under what authority, with what prior checks, and who assumed responsibility. That is why every change initiated by the factory starts with qualified intent — a business requirement, bug fix, or vulnerability remediation — strictly bounded by architecture rules and security policies set for the mission.
During execution, the system passes no gate without verification: each required check, from unit and integration test suites to static and dynamic security scans, produces an enforceable record. The factory progresses only when safeguards are validated sequentially, preventing silent drift from established engineering standards.
The cycle concludes with human validation: depending on the contracted autonomy tier and your environment configuration, the responsible internal engineer reviews the change, inspects control results, and issues explicit, timestamped approval. The entire history is recorded in a complete audit trail recording every command and decision, providing an evidence bundle ready for immediate regulatory review.
These five safeguards align directly with key European frameworks.
Regulatory mapping: AI Act, DORA, NIS2, and ISO 42001
European regulations share a common objective: an end to unmonitored black boxes and documented governance over critical digital processes. The AI Act mandates traceability across inference systems, rigorous risk management, and qualified human supervision. Argy contributes directly to that documentation obligation by confining operations within an auditable perimeter where internal engineers retain final authority — the final legal compliance determination remains your organization's responsibility.
For financial and insurance institutions governed by DORA, continuous delivery logging and systematic tracking of third-party software components feed the operational resilience evidence expected during supervisory audits. Likewise, on the software supply chain security strand addressed by NIS2, upfront dependency vetting and thorough event recording document the technical controls applicable to that scope — without substituting for the full compliance assessment the directive requires.
Furthermore, this approach mirrors ISO 42001 management principles: governance policies, sign-off thresholds, and verification records are version-controlled and readily inspectable. Your teams no longer spend weeks reconstructing evidence after releases: the complete bundle is accessible the moment production deployment occurs.
Compliance is only meaningful if your data remains under your exclusive control.
European sovereignty and governed European hosting
For banks, mutuals, healthcare groups, and public sector organizations, entrusting production software to unmanaged third-party providers introduces direct regulatory liability. Argy operates with European hosting situated in a European Union member state, aligned with applicable GDPR requirements.
For sensitive or air-gapped environments, an on-premises gateway option allows executing the gateways and verification pipelines configured for your scope inside your private network, under contractual terms stipulating that customer data is not used to train third-party models.
This operating model includes defined reversibility terms: your factory rules, governance policies, and evidence archives remain the property of your organization and can be exported without proprietary lock-in.
How do these commitments work at the contractual level?
Autonomy tiers and contractual engagement
Service levels and engagement terms are calibrated with your production management, depending on the contracted autonomy tier chosen for your scope — a point we clarify together in discovery.
Every deployment has its own regulatory constraints and contracted autonomy tier. Let's discuss what applies to yours.
Turn compliance requirements into a competitive advantage.
Establish proof across your production applications
Schedule a discussion with our compliance specialists to map your industry requirements and calibrate engagement terms tailored to your context.