Loading…
Layer 5 — The proof
Open, verifiable, and developer-friendly.
These are not four products in a navigation bar. They are four answers to four different doubts — which is why they only make sense once you know what Decionis is for.
Four forms of evidence orbiting one protocol. The Sandbox: try Decionis, verify the proof. The Policy Exchange: discover, reuse, and share policies. Connectors: bring Decionis to where you work. GitHub: the public govern Action and Node SDK, plus independently verifiable Decision Dossiers. These are not four products in a navigation bar; they are four answers to four different doubts. Transparency builds trust, and proof drives adoption.
Four forms of evidence
“Is this a real system or a landing page?”
GitHub
Proof we are real.
The govern Action and the Node SDK are public, and every Decision Dossier can be verified against our published JWKS without trusting our code.
“Does the protocol actually stop anything?”
Sandbox
Proof the protocol works.
Try to overspend, violate policy, delete production, expose secrets or bypass approval, and watch the verdict come back. No account required.
“Can we express our own authority in it?”
Policy Exchange
Proof people can build on it.
Open, forkable decision recipes — the executable policies other teams already run, ready to adapt rather than author from scratch.
“Can we actually deploy it where we work?”
Connectors
Proof it is deployable.
Every place Decionis becomes available — checkout, ERP, ITSM, agent tool calls — reached without rewriting the system it governs.
Which proof do you need?
Pick the role you are reading as. Each route lists the questions that audience actually asks, and where each one is answered.
Developer
You will wire this into a codebase and need to know how it behaves under failure.
What you are asking
- “How long does the setup actually take?”
- “What does the call look like, and what comes back?”
- “Is it deterministic — same input, same verdict?”
- “What is the added latency?”
- “What happens when Decionis is unreachable?”
- “Can I test it locally without an account?”
Where it is answered
Security & compliance
You have to defend this in an audit and know exactly what is retained and where.
What you are asking
- “Which policy version governed a given action?”
- “How do I verify a signature without trusting you?”
- “Who held the authority, and is it separated from execution?”
- “What is retained, for how long, and where does it run?”
- “How does this map onto our control framework?”
Where it is answered
Business buyer
You are deciding whether this pays for itself and how risky the rollout is.
What you are asking
- “How much money would this have protected?”
- “How many actions would have been restrained?”
- “What is the false-positive rate on my own traffic?”
- “How long until I see a number I can defend?”
- “What is the risk of turning it on?”
Where it is answered
Platform partner
You are evaluating whether to list, co-sell or build against Decionis.
What you are asking
- “Is there real demand from your shared users?”
- “How mature is the integration, honestly?”
- “What support burden lands on us?”
- “What is the security posture for a review?”
- “Which joint use cases actually close?”
Where it is answered
If you want to go further
Evidence for the specific claims teams push back on hardest — money, signatures, drift, and compliance posture.
Prevented-loss methodology
How a blocked action becomes a defensible number, and where we refuse to claim one.
Verify a Decision Dossier
Check an Ed25519 signature against the published JWKS yourself.
Public drift dashboard
Live policy-drift signals, published rather than described.
Trust and compliance posture
The exact certification status, stated without rounding up.
Transparency builds trust. Proof drives adoption.