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 State, New York Appellate Division · 2012 · Evidence challenged

Karam v. Adirondack Neurosurgical Specialists

93 A.D.3d 1260 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

EMR audit trail

What happened

In a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff challenged the integrity of a clinical note that was critical to the hospital's defence. Metadata and audit trail analysis of the hospital's EMR system revealed that the note's actual creation and modification time conflicted with the timestamp that the system displayed to clinicians and administrators. The discrepancy existed within the hospital's own centralised system: the audit trail contradicted the displayed record. The court admitted this evidence and used it to impeach the credibility of the medical record on the key timing questions in the case. The case is a foundational US authority for the discoverability of EMR audit trails, and illustrates that the timestamps displayed by centralised clinical systems can differ from the actual system-level audit logs, creating an internal inconsistency that opens the entire record to challenge.

Outcome

Medical record credibility impeached on critical timing. Audit-trail conflict admitted in evidence.

Sources

Authority source confirmed

AuthFindLaw: N.Y. App. Div. 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