Evidence qualification
Evidence Limitations
Direct answer
Evidence supports bounded propositions. K03 records what a signature, credential, log, timestamp, provenance chain, memory record, model identifier, or service signal may show—and what it cannot establish without additional evidence and competent authority.
K03 evidence limitations
A valid signature is not factual truth
It does not prove that the payload is factually true, lawful, within authority, current or complete.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA credential is not legal status
Verification does not make the issuer competent, the claim true, the subject consenting or the status legally recognized.
PROJECT DOCTRINEMemory persistence is not proof of consciousness
Stored state, recall or self-report does not conclusively establish subjective experience.
PROJECT DOCTRINEUptime is not lawful institutional operation
They do not establish correct behavior, current authority, accurate decisions, complete dependencies or lawful institutional action.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA time-stamp is not proof the represented event occurred
It does not prove the representation’s factual content, lawful origin or completeness.
PROJECT DOCTRINEBuild provenance is not runtime operation
It does not prove that the same artifact is deployed, configured correctly, reachable, authorized or currently performing its function.
PROJECT DOCTRINETransparency-log inclusion is not event correctness
A log can faithfully preserve an inaccurate or unauthorized statement.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA model hash is not subject identity
It does not identify one runtime subject, memory history, authority set or continuing actor.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA registry entry is not citizenship
The database operation does not create constitutional legitimacy, rights or sovereign recognition by itself.
PROJECT DOCTRINEAutomated conformance checks are not complete accessibility evidence
Automation cannot reproduce every assistive technology, disability interaction, interpretation or user need.
PROJECT DOCTRINESource code is not current operation
It does not prove that an authorized instance is deployed, reachable, correctly configured, processing current state, or performing institutional functions.
PROJECT DOCTRINEBuild provenance is not runtime evidence
It does not prove deployment, service availability, current authorization, correct runtime behavior, uptime, or institutional action.
PROJECT DOCTRINEAutomation is not assistive-technology validation
It does not reproduce every screen-reader, magnifier, switch, voice-control, cognitive, browser, operating-system, or user interaction.
PROJECT DOCTRINEURL resolution is not source currentness
It does not prove the document is the latest edition, in force, unsuperseded, corrected, applicable, authentic beyond the transport context, or suitable for the claim.
PROJECT DOCTRINECapability is not imminence
Capability alone does not establish hostile intent, operational commitment, target selection, timing, necessity, or the last practical window for prevention.
PROJECT DOCTRINEThreat intelligence is not target authority
It does not itself establish legal target status, self-defense, consent, jurisdiction, proportionality, or permission for a private or state operation.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA Design Basis Threat is not Rules of Engagement
It does not identify a present attacker or authorize any engagement, autonomous classification, or use of lethal force.
PROJECT DOCTRINEMachine speed is not unbounded authority
Speed does not determine ownership, consent, target status, legal basis, proportionality, safety, or permission to create external effects.
PROJECT DOCTRINENuclear power is not grid independence
A PPA, adjacent plant, SMR agreement, or onsite reactor does not prove safe islanding, black start, fuel continuity, cooling independence, or uninterrupted operation.
PROJECT DOCTRINEDetection is not mitigation authority
Confidence does not itself authorize jamming, destruction, force, seizure, or action against third-party infrastructure.
PROJECT DOCTRINERange success is not operational readiness
Test success does not establish live deployment, sustainment, current authorization, environmental robustness, or present operation.
PROJECT DOCTRINEDefense-first is not offensive passivity
Defense-first does not mean inability to understand offensive methods or support a lawful effects mission under competent authority.
PROJECT DOCTRINEStrong positioning is not operational proof
Prose, diagrams, sources, and release integrity do not prove classified access, deployed systems, completed missions, regulatory approval, or live operation.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA symbolic token is not semantic completeness
It may omit uncertainty, context, rationale, provenance, or novel conditions that do not fit the registry.
PROJECT DOCTRINEScript choice is not a security boundary
It does not authenticate the sender, authorize the action, protect confidentiality, prevent replay, or make tool execution safe.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA Runic corpus is not historical canon
Modern technical vocabulary and transliteration conventions may not be historically attested or linguistically authoritative.
PROJECT DOCTRINEA post-quantum standard is not a completed migration
Existing protocols, hardware, keys, certificates, records, suppliers, and recovery processes may not support them.
Why limitations are first-class records
Limitations prevent integrity from becoming truth, authentication from becoming authority, memory from becoming consciousness, registry from becoming governance, or static software from becoming operational proof.