Services

Bounded engagements with a fixed scope and a fixed deliverable.

Technical Review

We examine how a defined system, workflow or integration actually behaves, and deliver documented, verifiable results. Our focus is AI agents, agent integrations and the evidence behind verification claims.

Review areas include:

  • AI Agent Security: agent permissions, tool access, delegation, and whether boundaries are enforced or only assumed.
  • MCP Integrations: MCP servers, which tools are exposed to which agents, and integration risks.
  • Evidence Integrity: evidence chains, logs, hash values, and whether verification claims are supported by the evidence.
  • Multi-Agent Workflows: handoffs, reviewer independence, refusals and stop conditions.
  • AI-Generated Code: incorrect assumptions, defects, test coverage, and claims of verified functionality.

Every engagement includes:

  • Investigation: establish what the system does, as opposed to what it is documented or assumed to do.
  • Defect reproduction: reported or suspected defects reproduced in a controlled, repeatable way, with recorded inputs, steps, outputs and checksums, so the result can be re-run and checked independently.
  • Documented review: scope, method, findings, reproduction records and stated limitations. Anything not established is reported as not established.
Discuss an engagement →

Public technical work

EVE Verified has submitted public technical comments on the Proof-of-Control working draft at Linux Foundation Decentralized Trust.

Our contributions include:

  • Verification scope: a proposal for machine-readable disclosure of what a verification result does and does not assess, including NOT_ASSESSED for content outside the verified scope.
  • Evidence integrity: a reproducible analysis showing that a fail-closed refusal and an omitted record produce identical results from the published verifier, at a pinned commit of the reference implementation.

Comment #77 is listed in the working group's public-comment register as an open item for the working group to take up. These contributions show our approach to evidence-based technical review.

These are public technical contributions, not certifications, endorsements, organizational membership claims or adopted standard requirements.

How an engagement works

  1. Scope: we agree in writing on the system, the questions and the deliverable.
  2. Work: stays inside the agreed scope.
  3. Delivery: a documented result with reproducible evidence.

What this is not

  • Not a certification, audit opinion or compliance attestation.
  • Not a guarantee that a system is free of defects.
  • Each engagement covers the agreed scope only.