Skip to content

Evidence

The part of the incident that survives the conversation.

An evidence record is a compiled artifact for one incident: what was measured, over what window, from where, what the detector concluded, and the hashes that let a stranger check none of it was altered.

The artifact

RELIASTRAmeasurement recordPrepared for example-org · issued 14 Nov 2025, 10:02:11 UTC
Report referenceRA-20251114-PAYMENTSAP-E0B13Illustrative values

Independently measured · signed record

payments-api

Major dependency event on payments-api - resolved: 83.33% measured availability over 35 min 25 s

Incident window

35 min 25 s

14 Nov 2025, 09:12 → 09:48 UTC

Measured availability

83.33%

30 of 36 measured checks reached the target

Measured downtime

5 min 54 s

inside a 35 min 25 s window, 6 failed check(s)

Attribution

Vendor failure

91.25% confidence · v1.0

What the record shows

  • 6 of 36 checks issued to https://api.payments.example/v1/charges failed inside a 35 min 25 s window beginning 14 Nov 2025, 09:12:41 UTC. Measured availability for the window is 83.3333%, computed from these checks only.
  • The longest unbroken run of failed checks was 6, at 1 observation point. The detection rule that opened this incident was recorded as “Consecutive failed checks (single observation point)”.
  • The attribution engine classified this as “Vendor failure” at 91.25% confidence under methodology v1.0. That classification describes what the timelines support, not fault or liability.
  • Every observation here was issued from a single RELIASTRA observation point. Confirmation is by persistence of failure over 35 min 25 s, not by agreement between independent points, and no cross-verification is claimed.

1. Incident RecordFinal · incident resolved

Report ReferenceRA-20251114-PAYMENTSAP-E0B13
Incident ID0e7c1f38-9b2a-4d6e-8c51-2f4a7d9e0b13
Organizationexample-org (a41d6c02-3e88-4f17-9a25-7b6c0d1e5f92)
Monitored Dependencypayments-api (https://api.payments.example/v1/charges)
Severity / StatusMajor / Resolved
Started At (UTC)14 Nov 2025, 09:12:41 UTC
Resolved At (UTC)14 Nov 2025, 09:48:06 UTC
Measurement Window (UTC)14 Nov 2025, 09:12:41 UTC – 09:48:06 UTC · 2125 s
Observation TopologySingle observation point - 1 observation point recorded in this window (us-east)

3. Incident Window Measurements

Checks In Window36 (36 that reached the endpoint are the denominator)
Successful Checks30
Failed Checks6
Blocked Checks (Excluded)0
Measured Availability83.3333% over 36 measured checks
Longest Failure Run6 consecutive failed check(s)
Latency (ms)mean 412.3 ms · p50 398.0 ms · p95 812.4 ms · min 121.0 ms · max 934.6 ms
First / Last Observation14 Nov 2025, 09:12:41 UTC → 14 Nov 2025, 09:47:41 UTC

4. SLA Impact Calculation

Planned Target Uptime100.0% (0 s allowable inside this window)
Measured Availability In Window83.3333%
SLA Degradation Impact16.6667% (target − measured, floored at zero)
Measured Downtime5 min 54 s (354.17 s, measured share of the window)
Allowance Exceededyes
Calculation Basis6 of 36 measured checks failed inside the 2125 s window (1 observation point(s)).

8. Deterministic Attribution

ClassificationVendor failure
Confidence Score91.25%
Methodologyv1.0
Evidence Data Hash (SHA-256)9f2c41b7e08ad35c6f1942…62d9085a17
Public Verification IDrsl_ver_7Q4M2X8A3RK9TZ0B
SignatureSigned · Ed25519, key 9f2c41ba77de3311

https://reliastra.com/reports/rsl_ver_7Q4M2X8A3RK9TZ0B

printed as a scannable code

Retained for 365 days, then deleted: only the hashes recorded at the verification address remain checkable. Sections 1, 3, 4 and 8 are shown; the full document carries eleven, including the observation appendix and this block in full. Headings, labels and formatting are the ones the generated report uses; the values are an example, not a recorded incident.

Illustrative structure. The field labels and section order are the ones the renderer emits; the values shown are an example, not a real incident.

01The finding

Four figures before the sections that substantiate them.

A reader opens a document of record with one question. Answer it on the first page, then show the working - a report that makes somebody hunt for the number is a report that gets skimmed.

  1. 01Incident window
  2. 02Measured availability
  3. 03Measured downtime
  4. 04Attribution

02Contents

Ten sections, and the fields in each.

01

Incident Record

  • Report Reference
  • Incident ID
  • Organization
  • Monitored Dependency
  • Severity / Status
  • Started At (UTC)
  • Resolved At (UTC)
  • Measurement Window (UTC)
  • Observation Topology
02

Detection Record

  • Detection Rule
  • Rule Identifier
  • Detector Confirmation
  • Basis
03

Incident Window Measurements

  • Checks In Window
  • Successful Checks
  • Failed Checks
  • Blocked Checks (Excluded)
  • Measured Availability
  • Longest Failure Run
  • Latency (ms)
  • First / Last Observation
04

SLA Impact Calculation

  • Planned Target Uptime
  • Measured Availability In Window
  • SLA Degradation Impact
  • Measured Downtime
  • Allowance Exceeded
  • Calculation Basis
05

Observed Latency And Failures

The chart, drawn from the observations in the appendix rather than from a separate aggregate.

06

Rolling 24-Hour Health (Context)

  • Rolling 24h Availability
  • Rolling 24h Average Latency
  • Rolling 24h Checks
07

Correlated Dependency Events

  • Correlated Dependency
  • Correlation Method
  • Time Window
  • Confidence
08

Deterministic Attribution

  • Classification
  • Confidence Score
  • Methodology
09

Documented Observations

  • Executed At (UTC)
  • Observation Point
  • Result
  • Latency
  • Status
  • Detail
10

Authenticity, Retention and Verification

  • Verify this record
  • Signature
  • Retention
  • Rendered By

03Integrity

Three separate things are being proved.

A checksum over the payload, a checksum over the rendered bytes, and a signature over the payload. They answer different questions, so the artifact reports them separately instead of collapsing them into one reassuring word.

Evidence data hash
SHA-256 over the canonical 2.0 payload - the incident's facts as data.
Document checksum
SHA-256 over the rendered file. A PDF cannot contain the hash of itself, so this lives on the record.
Signature
Ed25519 over the payload bytes, when the deployment has a signing key. Public key at /v1/verify/keys.
GET /v1/verify/{verification-id} · no authenticationjson
{
  "found": true,
  "incident_id": "9f1c8b0e-…",
  "time_window": {
    "start": "2026-09-18T09:53:00+00:00",
    "end": "2026-09-18T10:07:00+00:00"
  },
  "data_hash": "3f9a…c41e",
  "report_checksum": "0c72…a1b9",
  "methodology_version": "v1.0",
  "authenticity": {
    "signed": true,
    "algorithm": "Ed25519",
    "signature_covers": "canonical payload bytes",
    "public_keys": "/v1/verify/keys"
  }
}

Footer fields

  • Evidence Data Hash (SHA-256)
  • Document Checksum
  • Public Verification ID
  • Evidence Schema Version

Probes are issued from 1 observation point today, on a 300-second interval by default. Every page that reports a measurement says which window it covers and how many observations stand behind it.

04What it establishes

  • Show what this dependency did during a window, from outside your network and the vendor’s.
  • Show the observations the conclusion rests on, individually, with timestamps.
  • Show that the document has not been altered since it was issued.

05What it does not

  • Establish what happened inside the vendor’s infrastructure. The probe records the path it took, not the vendor’s internals.
  • Establish that every one of the vendor’s customers was affected. One observation point measures one path.
  • Prove a contract was breached. It reports measurements; your agreement with the vendor decides what they mean.

The only way to judge a record is to see one.

Start observing a dependency you already run, and the first confirmed incident produces a real one - with your endpoint on it and nobody else’s.