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.
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?
Nothing changes on the floor. Everything changes for the receiver.
① Your team just saves, as always.
- The usual step
- Fill in the record and save
- On save
- A proof is attached (API, behind the scenes)
- The document itself
- never sent
② They just open a link.
- Proven fact
- approved with proper authority and procedure
- the approval contents, approver and separation of duties
- not shown
- Login / keys
- not needed
- The document stays private — the record itself is never sent or disclosed.
- Independent verification — the receiver just opens a link. No account, no keys.
- Edits are detected — even a one-character edit fails verification.
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.
Why the usual methods fall short.
Only work that needs all three at once — pass without exposing, independent verification, tamper-evidence — is Lemma's domain.
| Method | Pass without exposing | Independent verification | Tamper-evident | What happens |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Access control / permissions | △ | ✗ | ✗ | “Someone inside could have edited it” remains possible |
| Masking / redacted copies | △ | ✗ | ✗ | Redaction work grows; the original is still unproven |
| Encrypt and store / send | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | To verify, the receiver needs it disclosed after all |
| Lemma (ZK proof)the only one with all 3 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | The receiver just opens a link |
How it works — and how to start.
We help design disclosure scope and retention, run the PoC, and support production.
Start with a 30-minute call.
Tell us the one approval flow where audit/tampering risk matters most, in the first 30 minutes. No disclosure of sensitive data required.
Find the case that matches your industry and problem
Browse all 36 use cases →TRY LEMMA
Run it yourself.
No sales call needed — start hands-on with Lemma's products.