1GUARD Gate — Cotrugli Ledger

An AI agent wants to pay. Who said it could?

When software starts spending money, “the model decided to” is not an answer anyone can audit, and “we have a policy” is not one anyone can check. The gate turns every payment intent into a deterministic decision — allow, require a co-signature, escalate, or block — measured against a mandate that was committed in advance, and it leaves evidence that anyone can re-verify offline.

Launch the live demo →

The demo asks for a username and password. We issue those directly — ask us for access.

What it is

Deterministic authority, not a judgement call.

The gate does not have opinions. Given the same intent and the same committed mandate, it reaches the same decision every time — which is what makes the decision auditable at all. You can re-run it and get the same answer, or the gate is broken.

Crucially, it authorizes nothing that the mandate did not already permit. It is not a system that decides whether spending is a good idea; it is a system that enforces, and evidences, a boundary a human set earlier.

Each decision carries its whole chain: the intent, the context it was committed against, the decision itself, the budget position, and a bundle bound by hash to all of it. Reason codes say why, in terms that survive being read six months later by somebody else.

What you can check yourself

Run the gate. Try to make it lie.

You can evaluate the kernel yourself against the fixture mandate: change the amount, change the counterparty's status, and watch the decision change deterministically. Nothing is persisted — it is a pure evaluation.

And the tamper control is part of the demo, not a footnote: alter the evidence and verification must fail, with named errors. It does.

The full decision spectrum

Within-budget allows with reservations, co-sign above threshold, over-max block, revoked mandate block, unresolved counterparty escalate.

The evidence chain

Intent, committed context, decision, budget, and a hash-bound bundle — verifiable offline.

Run it yourself

Change the amount or the counterparty and get the deterministic answer. Nothing is stored.

What this does not claim

An authority layer — and nothing more.

Infrastructure that oversells itself is worse than none, because people rely on it for things it was never built to do. So, plainly:

The gate authorizes nothing newIt cannot permit what the committed mandate did not already allow. It narrows; it never grants.

There is no custody, bank or signer hereThis is the authority and evidence layer only. No money moves, and nothing in this demo touches a real account.

Deterministic is not the same as safeReproducibility makes decisions auditable. It is not a claim about the security posture of anything around it.

The demo data is syntheticThe mandates, agents and counterparties are invented for the exhibit.