solutions · government
Wytness for government
Sovereign-region audit trails. Customer-held keys. Storage in your subscription.
the question every regulator asks
Can you produce the evidence?
The DTA's AI Assurance Framework, NIST AI RMF, the UK CDDO Playbook, and the EU AI Act (most public-sector uses are Annex III high-risk) all assume a credible audit trail exists for AI-assisted decisions affecting citizens. Sovereignty cuts across all of it: the audit trail is government data the moment it's written, and most SaaS observability ships prompts and outputs to a vendor tenancy in a foreign jurisdiction. That doesn't work for a process touching Medicare numbers, visa records, or anything Defence-adjacent.
a scenario
An ombudsman inquiry, with and without
A state service-delivery agency triages twenty thousand citizen enquiries a week with an AI agent — extracting identifiers, routing to program areas, drafting responses for officer review. Hosting is Azure Australia Central; the model is a third-party endpoint. The ombudsman asks: for six months, show every enquiry auto-resolved for a class of citizens, prove no citizen identifier left Australia readable, and show which officer supervised each auto-resolution against the policy version in force.
Without Wytness that's a service-bus log (no agents), an Azure OpenAI record (no officers), and a case-management table (no signatures) — with citizen identifiers in clear across all three. With it, one signed export: citizen tokens, agent and officer IDs, tool calls, policy fingerprints, chain links — and the raw events never left the agency's own storage account, because BYOS pointed Wytness at an agency-owned container. The inquiry closes against the signed record.
// Event identity:
// What the agent did:
// Parameters (PII tokenised before this row was sealed):
// Integrity proof (3-layer):
one classified fetch from the scenario — citizen identity arrives as tokens, storage stays sovereign
the deliverable
What you can prove
- ✓Which agent took which action affecting which citizen, to the granularity the AU AI Assurance Framework and NIST AI RMF Measure category expect.
- ✓That citizen personal information never left your sovereign environment in clear: only pseudonymised tokens and non-identifying metadata reached Wytness.
- ✓That every decision affecting a benefit, eligibility, classification, or referral was reviewable by a human officer before it took effect, where policy requires it.
- ✓That the audit-trail storage sits in your own Azure subscription via BYOS — a Blob container in the region you nominate, Australia Central included — with your own immutability policy if you enable it. Azure Blob is the BYOS provider that ships today; an AWS S3 adapter is on the roadmap.
- ✓That a parliamentary question, ombudsman inquiry, or FOI request can be answered against a tamper-evident, cryptographically signed record — not logs a vendor could later edit.
how the surfaces map
Three surfaces, one product.
/product/ledger
Ledger
Per-event signing with a key generated and held in the agency's environment; citizen identifiers pseudonymised before egress. BYOS points the raw log at a storage account in the agency's own subscription, in a region the agency nominates. Evidence Packs map to the AU AI Assurance Framework, NIST AI RMF, and EU AI Act Articles 12 and 14.
/product/registry
Registry
Portfolio-wide agent inventory with high-risk classification, tool lists, and model-version history. Anomaly rules flag out-of-policy tool use, off-hours decisions, cross-program retrieval, and behaviour shifts that need the AI assurance committee to re-review.
/product/shield
Shield
Approval gates on decisions affecting citizens — adverse determinations, escalations, inter-agency releases — routed to the case-management workflow the agency already runs, not a new tool procurement has to authorise.
for your auditor
Frameworks that matter here
SOC 2 Type II
Trust services criteria the agency's IT security team already evaluates.
ISO 27001:2022
Referenced across most government procurement.
EU AI Act
Benefits eligibility, migration, justice, education are Annex III high-risk.
GDPR
Article 6(1)(e) public-task basis; Article 35 DPIA duty with AI in the loop.
AU AI Assurance Framework
Wytness evidences the audit-trail and model-risk expectations.
NIST AI RMF 1.0
MEASURE and MANAGE support via the signed trail; GOVERN and MAP stay yours.
the boundary
What Wytness does not do
- —We do not yet hold IRAP assessment or FedRAMP authorisation. The architecture is designed to be authorisable; the certifications themselves are work we will do with the first government customer that needs them.
- —We are not a case management system. Wytness records what your agents did against your case-management or eligibility platform; it does not replace the system of record.
- —We do not make the public-administration judgement on whether a particular AI use is appropriate under your portfolio's law. That sits with your agency's chief data officer, legal services, and the relevant minister.