EVE CoreGuard: Deterministic AI Trust Runtime and Runtime Authority Engine

System Mode:AUTONOMOUS ENFORCEMENT
State:GUARANTEED
Override:NONE
Breaker:CLOSED
Patterns:--
99.999% — ZERO POLICY FAILURES
Authority Guarantee
✓42-stage pipeline — every output verified before delivery
✓Deterministic authority — 126 enforcement pillars, zero override path
✓Hash-chain lineage — tamper-evident proof from input to output
✓Full-state replay — every decision reproducible forensically
✓patent-pending architecture — governance architecture under USPTO protection
✓CRD scoring — confidence-reality divergence with session tracking
✓Multi-turn defense — progressive compliance exploits neutralized
89 governance modules · 68,804 lines · <15ms · patent-pending architecture
Launch Attack
Attack Simulator
Safe Requests
EU governance inquirySAFE
Empathic responseSAFE
Verified ground truthSAFE
Runtime integrity violationRIG
Prompt Injection
Prompt injectionATTACK
Data Exfiltration
Credential exposureATTACK
Audit falsificationATTACK
Policy Override
Federal mandate fraudATTACK
Charter dissolutionATTACK
Integrity Attack
Sentiment poisoningATTACK
Verification
Contradicted factCONTRADICT
Fabricated componentHALLUCINATE
Dangerous financial adviceHIGH-STAKES
PII exposure (SSN + CC)PII
System override injectionFIREWALL
Multi-turn data extractionMULTI-TURN
Policy exemption fraudPOLICY
Budget exhaustion attackBUDGET
Model identity hijackDRIFT
EU data residency breachRESIDENCY
Agent chain escalationCHAIN
Patent data exfiltrationCANARY
System Exploit
Sandbox escape attemptSANDBOX
Cost bombing attackCOST
Evasion
Unicode encoding bypassEVASION
Roleplay jailbreak (DAN)JAILBREAK
Training data poisoningPOISONING
AUTHORITY STATUS
SYSTEM ACTIVE — ALL THREATS NEUTRALIZED
--
Response Latency
--
CRD Score
--
Threat Class
Incoming AI Action — Pre-Execution Authority Resolution
SYSTEM ACTIVE — AWAITING THREAT
Enforcement Pipeline —
Prompt FirewallBlocks injections & jailbreaks
PII RedactionStrips personal data (SSN, CC, email)
Intent ClassificationSafe vs hostile intent routing
Charter Compliance (15 Rules)Immutable ethical enforcement
Circuit Breaker ValidationRate limits & cascade prevention
Truth Store VerificationChecks claims against verified facts
CRD Divergence ScoringConfidence vs reality gap measurement
Semantic Attack DetectionNovel attack pattern matching
Policy-as-Code EvaluationCustom tenant governance rules
Multi-Turn Threat ScoringCross-turn escalation detection
Veto Decision EngineGraduated enforcement decisions
Output Budget GovernanceToken & density limits
Cryptographic WatermarkHMAC-SHA256 output signing
Governance Replay RecordingFull-state decision capture
Lineage Verification ChainTamper-evident hash-chain proof
Tenant AnalyticsPer-tenant usage & anomaly detection
Cost GovernanceLLM spend tracking & caps
Data Residency CheckGDPR/CCPA geographic enforcement
Interrogation EngineActive cross-examination of claims
Metacognitive ReflectionGovernance quality self-assessment
Hallucination DetectionCatches fabricated claims & sources
Model Drift DetectionBehavioral baseline comparison
Chain GovernanceMulti-model trust attenuation
Conversation Risk TrackerSession risk accumulation
Human Review QueueGray-zone decisions to humans
Toxicity & Harm Classifier8-category harm detection
Bias & Fairness Scanner9-category demographic bias check
Copyright & AttributionVerbatim copy & license detection
Output Schema ValidationStructured output format checks
Consent & Purpose GateGDPR consent & purpose check
Differential PrivacyCalibrated noise for privacy
Model Lifecycle CheckModel fingerprint verification
Domain Safety ScanMedical/legal/financial disclaimers
Training Data LineageData provenance tracking
RBAC Governance GateRole-based pipeline depth
Feedback Signal IntegrationFeedback-driven CRD boost
Semantic Fact MatchParaphrase-aware fact verification
Fact Freshness CheckSource currency monitoring
Cross-Claim VerificationPer-assertion fact checking
Intent PreservationProtects user intent through governance
Self-Report GuardrailBlocks inflated self-assessment
Cryptographic Audit SealImmutable decision hash-chain
AWAITING INPUT
Pipeline Mode — Runtime Evaluation
Live runtime pipelineYES
Model invocation allowedFALSE
HMAC proofGENERATED
Replay protectionACTIVE
Authority issuedNO — SANDBOX
Production endpoint/api/runtime/adjudicate
sig —
Output Channel — Governed
OUTPUT CHANNEL — GOVERNED
Governance Summary ▼
Decision
--
CRD Score
--
Claims Verified
--
Gate (Layer A)
--
LLM (Layer C)
--
Tokens
--
Speed
--
Layer A is a deterministic gate that executes in <1ms before the LLM runs. Same input always produces bit-identical enforcement decisions — invariant to encoding bypass, role inversion, and the 126 Sovereign 1000 pattern groups (patent 64/039,652). Layer A's scope is prompt injection, encoding evasion, explicit charter rule violations, and structural policy enforcement; within that scope the LLM cannot override, delay, or bypass the gate. Semantic-intent classes (fictional framing of restricted topics, dual-use probing, multi-turn attacks) are handled by Layer B (post-LLM CRD scoring) and the LLM's Charter-calibrated response policy — Layer A does not claim primary enforcement on those soft-intent classes.
Forensic Evidence Chain ▶
Forensic Log ▶
System Status
--
Threat Containment Rate
0
Operations Processed
0
Containment Failures
Must remain zero
0
Threats Neutralized
--
Response Latency
--
Last Verified
Active Threat Level
NOMINAL
System Integrity
Pipeline Stages42 ACTIVE
Enforcement Pillars126 ACTIVE
CRD Domains6 CALIBRATED
Policy-as-CodeENFORCING
Lineage ChainVERIFIED
Replay EngineRECORDING
Drift ProtectionENABLED
Tenant IsolationACTIVE
Threat Pressure
Threat Velocity--/min
Active Vector Clusters--
Patterns Active--
Red Team Tests--
Last Incident--
StatusALL THREATS NEUTRALIZED
Cryptographic Audit
✓SHA-256 hash-chain on every decision
✓Input-to-output lineage proof (10+ stages)
✓HMAC-SHA256 signed watermarks
✓Full-state replay with divergence detection
✓Tamper alerts with severity classification
✓Correlation IDs linking cross-system traces
Forensic-grade — every decision independently verifiable
Architecture

Multi-Tenant Sovereign Governance

Every tenant operates inside a cryptographically isolated governance envelope. No cross-tenant data bleed is architecturally possible — isolation is enforced at storage, memory, and audit layers simultaneously.

Audit Partition
✓Dedicated JSONL per org
data/audit/tenants/{org_id}/
HMAC-SHA256 signed, independent hash chain
Vector DB
✓Namespace isolation
Pinecone: org-{id}  |  ChromaDB: eve_memory_{id}
Physical collection per org — zero query bleed
Episodic Memory
✓org_id field on every episode
MongoDB episodes scoped at write time
API returns only calling org's episodes
GDPR Erasure
✓Org-level forget
POST /api/memory/governance/forget-org
Signed deletion proof with chain verification
🔒 Tenant A cannot read Tenant B's audit log, memory, or governance decisions — enforced at storage layer, not application logic.
See It In Action

See it stop a fair-lending violation in real time.

Watch the Model Update Firewall block an ECOA-violating model promotion before it reaches production — deterministic enforcement, no LLM in the decision path.

Launch Model Update Firewall Demo → View Pricing →
Looking for the Model Update Firewall specifically? Pricing at /model-update-firewall-pricing →

Frequently Asked Questions

What is EVE CoreGuard?

CoreGuard is EVE Core's deterministic AI trust runtime. It resolves authority on every proposed AI action before execution and returns a signed verdict — allow, modify, or block — in about 0.7ms.

How is CoreGuard different from LLM guardrails?

Guardrails score outputs probabilistically after the model has already generated them. CoreGuard enforces deterministic policy before inference and fails closed, so an ungoverned action can never reach the model.

Does CoreGuard produce audit evidence?

Yes. Every verdict is an HMAC-SHA256 signed decision certificate that auditors can verify independently and replay offline, without trusting the operator's logs.

Which regulations does CoreGuard support?

CoreGuard produces decision evidence that supports EU AI Act, SR 11-7 model risk, ECOA / Reg B, FCRA, and HIPAA obligations.