immut is the Evidence Trust Layer. It sits underneath your existing compliance tools and anchors every file to the XRP Ledger blockchain with a precise timestamp. This creates tamper-evident, independently verifiable proof that a document existed at a specific moment — court-admissible in 88 countries.

Is blockchain evidence accepted in court?

Yes. Blockchain-anchored evidence has been accepted as legal evidence in US Federal Court (US v. Sterlingov, 2024), the EUIPO across all 27 EU member states (AZ Factory v. Valeria Moda, 2025), China's Supreme People's Court (1,400+ IP cases since 2018), and under EU Regulation 2025/2531. immut certificates are accepted in 88 countries and 171 jurisdictions.

Does my file leave my device?

No. immut generates a SHA-256 hash of your file on your own device. Only the hash is recorded on the blockchain. Your original file never leaves your infrastructure. Public proof. Private work.

Does immut replace Vanta or Drata?

No. immut is the proof layer that sits underneath your existing compliance tools. Vanta and Drata collect your evidence. immut proves when that evidence existed. They complement each other — immut adds the independent timestamp your compliance platform cannot provide.

Which compliance standards does immut support?

immut produces records that satisfy evidence requirements in ISO 27001, ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO 45001, SOC 2, GDPR, HMRC R&D, HSE health and safety, KYC/AML, EU AI Act, HIPAA, and more. Any standard that requires dated, tamper-evident records is supported.

What happens if immut shuts down?

Every certificate already issued remains independently verifiable on the public XRP Ledger. The proof does not depend on immut existing. A regulator, a judge, or opposing counsel can verify your certificate on the public blockchain at any time, with or without immut.

Evidence Record

US Federal, 2d Circuit · 2015 · Fabrication

Ceglia v. Zuckerberg

600 F. App'x 34 (2d Cir. 2015)

EmailBackdated documentDocument metadata

What happened

Paul Ceglia brought a claim asserting he owned 50% of Facebook based on a purported 2003 "Work for Hire" contract with Mark Zuckerberg, supported by emails claimed to be contemporaneous. Forensic experts engaged by Facebook analysed the contract and discovered that the ink chemistry showed the document was less than two years old at the time of examination, far more recent than the 2003 date it bore. Email metadata showed creation timestamps incompatible with the claimed sequence of events, and embedded font versions in supporting documents postdated their claimed creation. The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of the civil claim and the imposition of sanctions. Federal prosecutors subsequently indicted Ceglia for wire fraud and mail fraud based on the fabricated evidence. The case is a comprehensive illustration of how multiple independent metadata signals, including ink chemistry, document metadata, and email headers, can collectively expose a fabrication scheme that relied entirely on centralised, party-controlled records.

Outcome

Case dismissed with sanctions (~$76K). Criminal indictment for wire and mail fraud followed.

Sources

Authority source confirmed

AuthCourtListener: 2d Circuit opinion

Public proof. Private work.

immut records a cryptographic hash of your file on the public XRP Ledger at the moment of creation. The timestamp is independently verifiable by anyone.

Anchor your evidence

Evidence Record

See all 43 rulings on record.

Jurisdiction filters, evidence-type filters, and authority sources linked on every case.

Back to all cases|Get started free