Arbiter Developer Docs
Fragmented records are a structural failure, not a compliance inconvenience. Every regulated operation still asks the same questions (who owns which risk, which control applies, and whether the evidence still matches what was asserted) while each system keeps its own answer.
Arbiter is the system of record for those answers. The risk register entry (a risk, control, or policy record) is the unit of record: every entry carries a lifecycle state, mapped framework obligations, and SHA-256-fingerprinted evidence, with optional sealing onto Stratum for independent verification. Dashboard, REST API, and MCP read and write that same tenant data under the same RBAC — no separate contract per surface, and nothing to reconcile between them.
Who this is for
When the assessor asks for ownership, applicable controls, and whether evidence still matches what was asserted, you need one shared answer. Use this table to see if Arbiter is your path.
| You are… | The problem you feel | What Arbiter gives you |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance or risk owner in a regulated operation (financial services, professional services, and similar) | Answers live in different systems; prep becomes reconstruction | One live register of risks, controls, policies, and SHA-256-fingerprinted evidence your assessor can work from |
| Developer wiring partners or agents | A second permission model or scraped UI path | Same tenant data via REST or MCP under the same RBAC as the dashboard |
| External assessor or reviewer (including CPA engagements) | Screenshot packages and portal sprawl | Scoped read access plus hash-manifested export packages, not a separate portal SKU |
Start here. No workspace yet? Create one at arbiter.blockskunk.com. Then mint a key and complete a first call in Quickstart.
This documentation set is Early Access (v0): pages state what is live today versus contract-preview. It answers how do I interoperate with Arbiter?, not how Arbiter reaches a risk score or review conclusion. Arbiter is not a scoring engine, a legal opinion, or a settlement rail — it is the GRC system of record; optional Stratum sealing is a separate entitlement for independent digest proof. See Disclosure Boundary.
Explore by topic
| Topic | Start here |
|---|---|
| What Arbiter is and which surfaces exist | Integration Surfaces |
| Who can read or act | Access Model |
| States a record moves through | Lifecycle |
| Shapes partners and agents read | Records |
| What a fingerprint or seal proves | Verification |
| Machine-readable REST contract | API reference |
Use the matrix above to pick a starting page. The sections below expand what Arbiter delivers and how verification layers fit together.
What Arbiter gives you
| Capability | What it gives you |
|---|---|
| Lifecycle state | One shared answer to “where is this risk or control, and what can happen next.” |
| Multi-framework mapping | One control maps once across the frameworks you report against, not a parallel library per standard. |
| SHA-256 fingerprinted evidence | Tamper-evident proof at upload; if the file changes, the fingerprint breaks. |
| Assessor-ready exports | Audit-package ZIP with hash manifest for assessor handoff. |
| Scoped external reviewers | Read-only assessor access in-product, not a separate portal SKU. |
| Same data via UI, REST, MCP | One org, one permission model; programmatic surfaces inherit the user’s RBAC. |
| Optional Stratum seal | Independent ledger proof when entitled; see Verification. Maturity: available by arrangement. |
How the system fits
Three verification layers. Do not collapse them into a single claim.
- Operational (Live). Arbiter dashboard and APIs: risks, controls, policies, incidents. Day-to-day GRC at speed, role-scoped and audited.
- Hash-chained (Live). SHA-256 fingerprints on evidence and package manifests. Tamper-evident without requiring a ledger.
- On-chain (Available by arrangement). Metadata-only seals onto Stratum (
Verified on-chain). Proves anchoring of a published digest, not that Arbiter’s internal review was correct. NPI never leaves for the ledger path.
Beyond these boundaries, how review decides and how scores are reached is not part of this contract.
Reading order
Product / assessor vocabulary
| To answer | Read |
|---|---|
| Who can read or act on what | Access Model |
| States a risk or control moves through | Lifecycle |
| Shape of each record type | Records |
| What a fingerprint or seal proves | Verification |
| What stays public vs private | Disclosure Boundary |
Integrator path
| To answer | Read |
|---|---|
| Which surface can I build against today | Integration Surfaces |
| Mint a key and complete a first call | Quickstart |
| Auth and key lifecycle | Authentication |
| Machine-readable REST / Partner Read | API reference |
| Push/ack partner events | Webhooks |
Mint API keys in the signed-in Arbiter app under Settings. This public portal documents the contract; key minting requires login.