The value proposition
Why the authority sits outside the AI.
A model can interpret an instruction. It cannot be the record of what a human decided, or the judge of whether that decision is still the one that governs.
The architectural question
Asking the model to govern itself asks it to mark its own work.
Every safeguard built inside a model answers to that model, and to whoever ships it. Regulayer puts the authority somewhere else, so the system being governed is not also the system deciding whether it was governed.
The authority is external
It lives outside the system it governs, so the governed system cannot switch it off, argue with it, or quietly redefine it.
It is current, not historical
A human decision can change. The control answers to the newer one, including for work already in flight, and the decision it replaced is kept and marked as no longer current.
The human is a signing party, not a field
The person signs with their own key, as a party to the record, rather than appearing as a field inside a record signed by a platform.
It does not depend on the model provider
Regulayer is vendor-neutral and model-provider independent. Changing model, or vendor, does not change who holds the authority or who can verify the evidence.
The custody is yours
Local, private and on-premises configurations are supported where the deployment allows. Regulayer does not require a cloud service of its own.
Proof, not self-attestation
The evidence is checked by anyone holding the file, with public mathematics, rather than resting on the governed system's own account of itself.
No internet is required to seal or to verify
No internet is required to seal or to verify. Pull the network cable and it works exactly the same, and you can prove that with any network monitor: it never sends a byte.
There is no payload
Nothing runs on our infrastructure. There is nothing on our side to breach, subpoena or read. A record carries fingerprints and what you declared, never the file’s words and never its name.
The work never leaves the machine
The file is fingerprinted on your own machine. Only the fingerprint is ever used. You cannot read the document back out of it.
Your work does not need to be uploaded to Regulayer
Because the work does not need to reach Regulayer, Regulayer does not hold the content being reviewed. What that means for privilege in a given matter is a question for counsel, not a property we claim.
A strong seal is no use if getting it meant handing your document to someone else. Once they have a copy, you cannot take it back.
A fair comparison
Four kinds of tool already exist. We found none in the public materials we reviewed that does this.
The difference is not how strong the cryptography is. It is what happens to your work in the process, and whose decision gets signed.
| Where your work goes | What it establishes | Who signs the human decision | Who can check it | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 | Nowhere. Fingerprinted on your machine | What the person did, at the moment of work, sealed to the exact file | The person’s own key. The human is a signing party, not a field | Anyone. Free, offline, no account, independently |
| AI detectors | Uploaded and read. Seeing your content is how they work | An estimate about finished text, with a documented false-alarm rate | Nobody. There is no decision in it | Whoever runs the same tool, which may return a different result |
| Citation checkers | Uploaded to check the citations in it | That the cases you cited exist and say what you said | Nobody | You, inside the product |
| Cloud attestation | Evidence payloads processed and stored on their infrastructure | What the AI did | The reviewer is a field inside a record signed by the platform | A recipient, through their service |
| Online notarisation | The document is submitted to the platform | Who signed, bound to a verified legal identity | The platform signs | A recipient, through their service |
Categories, not a ranking. Each of these solves a real problem well. Online notarisation certifies identity, which is a different and useful job.
The work never leaves the machine
Only a fingerprint is used.
The human signs with their own key
As a party to the record, rather than appearing as a field inside a record signed by a platform.
Recipients verify free
Offline, with no account, and no contact with the issuer.
Composition is recorded at creation
Rather than estimated afterwards from finished text.
Periods with no record are themselves recorded
So silence is visible.
The limits are printed
On the face of every record.
The structural advantages
The structural advantages.
No marginal cost
Nothing runs on your infrastructure, so a customer costs nothing to serve.
Free verification is distribution
Every record sent to a client, a court or an opposing party puts the verifier in front of someone new, at no acquisition cost. The people most likely to need the product are exactly the people receiving records from someone who already has it.
No procurement
The buyer is the decision maker, the budget holder and the installer.
If the company stops
Every record already issued remains independently verifiable, free, with no dependency on the company, because the verifier is public and the key travels inside the record.
Independence of the checking party
An assurance signal carries more weight with a reviewer when the party producing it is independent of the party being checked.