Tamper-Proof Internal Control & Approval Records
Prove that approvals and segregation of duties happened "under legitimate authority and process," so auditors can verify it independently without seeing the contents. The records cannot be tampered with afterward, and the basis survives staff turnover.
🔔 Plan · Lemma Compliance →For internal-control teams
Not being able to show an approval or segregation of duties was legitimate when a J-SOX audit asks, solved by a tamper-proof trail.
-
Internal-control, internal-audit, and finance leads at listed companies, finance, manufacturing
-
Teams required to evidence approval workflows (requisition, payment, segregation of duties)
-
Organizations wanting to cut audit-response effort with a trail, not document assembly
Hand over the source, or just the facts?
Change what reaches the AI, and the leakage risk goes with it.
- approval_id:
- AP-2024-001
- amount:
- 1,200,000 JPY
- category:
- capex
- requester:
- Tanaka (Dept. head)
- approver_1:
- Yamada (Director)
- approver_2:
- Takahashi (CFO)
- subject:
- did:lemma:approval-AP2024-001
- issuer:
- did:lemma:org-acme-fin
- sourceHash:
- 0x4f8a…e1d3
- lineageChain:
- [request, approve_1, approve_2]
- recordedAt:
- 2024-08-15T14:30:00Z
- integrity:
- poseidon-merkle
- ZK verified:
- ✓ VALID
At the moment an approval occurs, we cryptographically fix that "a holder of legitimate authority approved it under a legitimate process." The approval contents (amount, counterparty, document body) are not disclosed. Segregation of duties (who may approve) is bound as an authority proof and kept tamper-free via provenance.
When audit arrives, internal audit, the audit firm, and third parties verify the same proof independently — without disclosing the era's data.
Choose on three criteria.
Only work that needs all three at once — pass without exposing, independent verification, tamper-proof — is Lemma's domain.
| Method | Pass without exposing | Independent verification | Tamper-proof |
|---|---|---|---|
| Access control only | △ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Masking / anonymization | △ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Encryption only | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ |
| Lemma (ZK proof)the only one with all 3 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
What's next
Not a standalone SaaS purchase. We enter through AI-adoption / data-governance consulting and a PoC, landing on an existing monthly plan.
- A 30-minute review — identify control points in approval flows where audit/tampering risk concentrates.
- Narrow to 1–2 decisions (results) to prove — e.g. "a legitimately authorized person approved per segregation of duties." Not the approval contents.
- Design connection and authority definitions — connection to existing workflow/ERP, and segregation-of-duties/authority definitions.
- Prove one path via a (quote-based) PoC.
- Land on an existing monthly plan (indicative) — Lemma Critical / Compliance; pricing confirmed in conversation.
Tell us the one approval flow where audit/tampering risk matters most, in the first 30 minutes. No disclosure of sensitive data required.
The bigger picture
The bigger picture this use case belongs to.
We map use scenarios across industries and workflows by the five proofs.
See use scenarios for Verifiable Origin in Solutions →TRY LEMMA
Run it yourself.
No sales call needed — start hands-on with Lemma's products.