AML decisions, provable in retention.
A sample of how a regional bank's financial-crime team could use The Hive Vault to produce signed evidence that every alert disposition was reviewed against a verifiable rubric and an auditable policy version. No real account data is shown here.
Engagement parameters
Thesis
Regulators want long-retention, tamper-evident proof that an AML alert disposition was made under a known policy version with known reviewer authority. The Vault produces a post-quantum-ready evidence bundle that meets that bar at decision-time.
What gets signed
Each alert disposition generates a receipt with the following bound elements:
- Alert ID + score + model versioned25519-signed
- Rubric version + decision tree pathmerkle-anchored
- Reviewer DID + delegation chainR3-bound
- Disposition + rationale hashblake2b-256
Sample stats
Illustrative · not a claimed deploymentSample portfolio: regional bank, AML/AFC AI screening on 14M annual transactions across retail + SMB. Numbers are illustrative; a real Vault is filled in with the buyer's own deployment.
Sample evidence packet — anonymized AML decision
Sample data · field shape onlyEach cleared, escalated, or filed alert emits a signed receipt. Field shape; values illustrative.
| Field | Type | Sample value | Bound to |
|---|---|---|---|
| alert_id | uuid | 01K7M2... | session_id |
| model_version | semver | aml-screen/4.1.0 | rubric_id |
| typology_hash | blake2b | c4a8...7f02 | ruleset |
| disposition | enum | ESCALATED_L2 | case_id |
| analyst_did | did:web | did:web:bank-aml-ops | delegation |
| sar_filed | bool | false (within 30d window) | case_id |
| sig_alg | alg | ed25519 | issuer DID |
Sample ROI — passing an OCC / FFIEC AML examination
Sample ROI · illustrative mathCost of producing decision-level evidence for a 90-day exam covering ~3.5M screened transactions. Illustrative. Exam-cycle frequency used here is hypothetical; actual frequency varies by supervisory standing and CAMELS rating.
- Alert disposition · rules-match flag · reviewer DID — signed at decision-time
- BSA / SAR retention compliance via tamper-evident Merkle anchor per disposition
- Programmatic receipt-pull replaces manual log-archeology for OCC sample requests
- Covers 2-cycle exam profile; reduces sample-pull + analyst-overtime exposure
Illustrative model only. Actual exam frequency, reserve methodology, and counsel costs vary materially by institution, supervisory standing, and geography.
- Alert cluster ID · typology-hash (blake2b) · delegation chain depth — full audit trail
- SAR window compliance flag tied to filing deadline; rubric version pinned per-decision
- Covers 4-cycle exam profile with consent-order reserve reduction at mid-tier scale
- Cross-department delegation chain proves reviewer authority level at each escalation
Illustrative model only. Actual exam frequency, reserve methodology, and counsel costs vary materially by institution, supervisory standing, and geography.
- Cross-correspondent tx audit trail · ML-DSA-ready sig slot · multi-jurisdiction rubric version
- CNSA 2.0 + FATF wire-attribution chain: receipts re-verifiable post-2035 algorithm rotation
- Covers 6-8 cycle profile at multi-jurisdictional correspondent exposure; re-issuance cost absorbed
- Per-record pq_sig reservation enables epoch flip without re-issuing BSA/SAR determinations
Illustrative model only. Actual exam frequency, reserve methodology, and counsel costs vary materially by institution, supervisory standing, and geography.
Cost of NOT being on this tier
Each exam cycle where BSA/SAR receipts cannot be re-verified under a new algorithm costs an estimated additional amount in re-issuance and audit delay. CNSA 2.0 mandates ML-DSA migration by 2030 for NSS; FATF guidance implies the same for correspondent chains. Re-issuance cost cited per NIST SP 800-131A Rev 3 migration framework.
Without Hive Vault
With Hive Vault
Per-exam-cycle delta: $2.62M. Sample annualized exposure reduction (slider-computed): $8.0M. Substrate cost runs in low-six-figures.
Post-quantum readiness
For high-security buyersDesigned-to-support · ML-DSA-ready
PQ-readiness aligned to NIST SP 800-208 + CNSA 2.0 timeline — receipts re-verifiable post-2035.
BSA / SAR retention runs 5-7 years; consent-order remediation can stretch a decade. The Vault's per-record pq_sig reservation lets banks attest to crypto-agility today and migrate signature alg per-domain during the R12 epoch flip — without re-issuing the underlying AML determination.
Sample receipt
This is the structure of the signed receipt your evidence room produces. Every field is verifiable offline against the issuer's public key.
Activation
In a real Vault this section is a live deeplink. The buyer pays USDC on Base; the receipt above is signed at confirmation; the dashboard URL + tenant API key issue inline.
activate · USDC · 0x15184Bf50B3d3F52b60434f8942b7D52F2eB436E · ERC-681 · evidence bundle attached
How a real Vault differs from this sample
A real Vault is invite-only and contains the actual buyer's name, the negotiated economic terms, the live activation deeplink against a specific tx, and the signed receipt chain. Each Vault is gated by a six-word passphrase issued at intake.