Defense contractors

Government cost accounting is audited on a delay measured in years. By the time an incurred-cost submission is examined, the ERP has been upgraded or replaced, the people who entered the timecards have moved on, and the contractor is asked to show not just what was recorded — labor distribution, cost allocation, asset charges against a contract — but that the records examined today are the records that existed then. Conventional systems answer with access logs and change-control attestations from the very system under examination. FORAY answers with evidence that does not depend on trusting the system that produced it: each record is hashed and its commitment anchored to a public chain, so any later edit is detectable because the bytes no longer reproduce the anchored commitment.

A contract is an Arrangement — who committed to what, from when. Cost recognition is an Accrual — a computed judgment with its method, inputs, and output declared. An expected billing or transfer is an Anticipation. A disbursement or delivery is an Action. The worked examples carry this sector's core patterns directly:

• Payroll: Salted Identities and Residue — a labor disbursement whose record owner is carried as a salted digest: identity is provable to a party entitled to know, without riding cleartext on the wire. Supporting labor-distribution detail travels inside the record, hashed with everything else.
• Work Order: Materials, Labor, and Overhead Roll-Up — direct materials, direct labor, and applied overhead as three computed judgments rolled into one expected transfer: the structural shape of a cost-buildup, with each element's method and inputs declared.
• Depreciation: Accrual-Only Adjusting Entry — asset cost recognition with a formula block: computation method, a salted formula identifier, named inputs, numeric output. The declared method is fixed at origination and provable unaltered years later.
• Combined Payment: One Action, Two Allocations — one settlement cleared against multiple expected costs with exact attribution: allocation amounts must sum to the settled amount exactly, as decimal values, no tolerance.
• The documentation record walks a complete contract-led chain — agreement, monthly recognition, expected payment, payment received — each component referencing backward to the commitment that started it.

No defense-native template (for example, cost-plus incurred-cost billing under a named contract line) exists in the generator's current set; the patterns above cover the sector's evidence structures with existing templates, and any sector-native exemplar would be authored as a generator template under the standing rule that no example anywhere is hand-written.

The anchor is permanent; the holder's ability to use it is exactly as durable as their custody. For every anchored record the holder keeps the exact record bytes, the full anchoring response (the salt and window material that reproduce the commitment), any formula packages behind declared computations, and the anchor reference — and can demonstrate completeness with a custody sheet a second party can re-verify. The Evidence Custody Model states the package, the retention discipline, and the succession expectations in full; in an environment where the audit arrives years later, custody is the half of the evidence story the contractor owns.

Verification is holder-side and requires no access to DUNIN7. The proofs page demonstrates it end-to-end on live mainnet anchors: hash the published body, rebuild the commitment with the published salt, match the on-chain payload byte-for-byte. The Verifier Specification defines the procedure for any independent implementation, and a validation PASS attests conformance to the ruled shape; the trust model is the precise statement of what every FORAY proof covers.