Enterprise · Compliance & Evidence

Compliance work,
mechanized.

Frameworks ask questions; your context pipeline should answer them with enforced controls and verifiable evidence. LeanCTX maps EU AI Act, ISO/IEC 42001 and SOC 2 to mechanisms it actually enforces — and is explicit about everything it cannot.

Honesty first: LeanCTX is tooling support for compliance work — not legal advice. "Aligned" is a technical statement about enforceable controls, not a certification. Every mapping carries this disclaimer, and every uncovered duty is a documented gap.

The mappings

Three frameworks, one honest matrix each.

Machine-readable mapping matrices, pinned to exact framework editions with a semi-annual review cycle. Each ships with a framework policy pack implementing the enforceable slice — inherit it, extend it, or audit your own pack against it.

Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

EU AI Act

11 of 14 mapped controls technically enforced

Deployer perspective on the context flow: Art. 12 logging (tamper-evident, always-on), Art. 26(6) six-month log retention, Art. 10(5) regulated-identifier redaction, Art. 14(4) oversight and intervention via hard budget caps, Art. 15(5) access control. Training-data governance and organisational duties are documented gaps — not hidden.

pack: eu-ai-act-deployer

ISO/IEC 42001:2023, Annex A

ISO/IEC 42001

Enforceable Annex A slices, gaps documented

A.6.2.6 operation logging, A.9.2 responsible-use process — the policy pack is the machine-enforced process definition — A.9.4 intended-use enforcement with recorded violations, A.7.4 data control before use. The AIMS itself is organisational by definition; the mapping says so.

pack: iso42001-aligned

AICPA TSC 2017 (2022 points of focus)

SOC 2

Context-pipeline slice of the TSC, evidence included

CC6.1 logical access (default-deny capability gate), CC6.6 boundary protection (egress denial + path jail), CC7.2 anomaly monitoring (typed security events), C1.1 confidentiality (credential + identifier redaction). Entity-level criteria stay with your org — the mapping draws the boundary.

pack: soc2-context

Source of truth: the mapping matrices in the repository — TOML, reviewable, diffable. Every full coverage claim names the CI test that proves enforcement; a drift test fails the build when claims and tests diverge.

Coverage reports

The audit conversation, as a command.

One command renders what assessors actually want to see: per-control verdicts against your real, resolved policy pack — not against a brochure.

$ lean-ctx policy coverage --framework eu-ai-act

AIA-12.1      Art. 12(1)    ENGINE        hash-chained audit trail, always-on
AIA-26.6      Art. 26(6)    ENFORCED      audit_retention_days = 365 (≥ 180 d)
AIA-10.5      Art. 10(5)    ENFORCED      4/4 regulated-identifier classes redacted
AIA-14.4e     Art. 14(4)(e) ENFORCED      max_context_tokens = 12000 bounds every assembly
AIA-10.2      Art. 10(2)    GAP           training-data governance is outside the pipeline

11 of 14 controls technically enforced (5 pack-verified, 6 engine guarantees) · 3 documented gaps

ENFORCED is verified live against your resolved pack — a weak pack downgrades to NOT-ENFORCED with exit code 1, so the report is CI-gateable. ENGINE guarantees cite the test that proves them. GAP rows state what remains an organisational duty. --json for your GRC tooling.

Evidence bundles

Auditors verify — without trusting us.

lean-ctx audit evidence exports a deterministic, Ed25519-signed ZIP: the tamper-evident audit segment for the period, the resolved policy pack in force, and the coverage reports. Same inputs, byte-identical bundle — regenerate and compare.

The counterpart, leanctx-verify, is a standalone tool with no engine code and four dependencies — an independent second implementation of the open evidence-bundle-v1 contract. It runs offline, on the auditor's machine, in well under a minute:

1

Archive + manifest

bundle well-formed, version supported

2

File inventory

every file matches its SHA-256, nothing added or removed

3

Chain replay

audit hash chain recomputes from anchor to head

4

Manifest signature

Ed25519 valid — against an out-of-band key if you have one

5

Entry signatures

each log line individually signed and verified

Mutation-tested: one flipped byte, one dropped line, one wrong key — INVALID. The auditor guide explains in plain language what the evidence proves and what it cannot (events are protected from the moment they are recorded — not before; an honest threat model is part of the format). Verifier source: packages/leanctx-verify.

FAQ

What compliance teams ask.

Does LeanCTX make us EU AI Act / ISO 42001 / SOC 2 compliant?

No tool can claim that, and we don’t. LeanCTX technically enforces the controls that live in the context pipeline — and proves the enforcement with CI tests and runtime evidence. The mapping matrices state per control whether coverage is full (enforced + tested), partial (residual gap described) or none (organisational duty). Compliance is an assessment humans make; LeanCTX hands them enforceable controls and verifiable evidence.

What exactly is in the mapping matrices?

Machine-readable TOML files, one per framework, pinned to an exact framework edition with a semi-annual review cycle. Each control carries the clause, a one-sentence requirement, the LeanCTX mechanism (pack rule, audit event, evidence export), the evidence an assessor receives, the coverage claim — and for every full claim, the name of the CI test that proves enforcement. A drift test fails the build if a claim points at a test that doesn’t exist.

How do I check our own setup against a framework?

lean-ctx policy coverage --framework eu-ai-act (or iso42001, soc2) renders the audit-conversation artifact: every control as ENFORCED (verified live against your resolved policy pack), ENGINE (CI-proven engine guarantee), NOT-ENFORCED (your pack doesn’t hold the rule — exit code 1, CI-gateable) or GAP (documented organisational duty). Add --json for machines.

What is an evidence bundle?

A deterministic, Ed25519-signed ZIP produced by lean-ctx audit evidence: the tamper-evident audit-chain segment for a period, the resolved policy pack that was in force, and the CGB + framework coverage reports. Identical inputs produce byte-identical bundles, so two parties can regenerate and compare. The format is an open contract (evidence-bundle-v1).

How does an auditor verify a bundle without trusting us?

With leanctx-verify — a standalone tool that shares no code with the engine and implements the published contract independently. It replays the hash chain and checks all signatures offline in five PASS/FAIL steps, in well under a minute. Mutation tests prove that a single flipped byte, a dropped log line or a wrong key turns the verdict INVALID. A plain-language auditor guide explains what the evidence proves — and, just as explicitly, what it cannot prove.

Bring evidence to your next audit conversation.

Run the coverage report against your own packs today — locally, free. Or talk to us about a pilot with your compliance team in the loop.