CliqueMap for Technical diligence
Turn architecture documents, access policies, and written answers into an evidence-backed diligence brief.
The question
Architecture overview, policy capture, change record.
A source-linked finding, the conflicting evidence, and the questions to take into your next diligence conversation.
A fictional vendor says its worker cannot read customer records. Follow the evidence before accepting the answer.
Source assertion
A statement is a starting point. Follow the claim to the exact passage and source version.
Evidence inspector
Architecture overview · v3 · §4.2
The report worker runs as svc-report-worker. It reads only from the billing-exports queue and has no access to the customer-records store.
Fictional sample · Exact source context stays attached.
Supporting passage
Source: architecture overview v3. Locator: §4.2, page 7. This document supports the statement; it does not verify deployed access.
Evidence inspector
SRC-2 · Architecture overview · 2026-03-02
The report worker runs as svc-report-worker. It reads only from the billing-exports queue and has no access to the customer-records store.
Fictional sample · Exact source context stays attached.
Conflicting evidence
The policy grants temporary access. Deployment identity is unresolved, and the final policy revision is missing. Record the conflict; do not declare it resolved.
Evidence inspector
SRC-3 · Access policy revision 17 · 2026-04-15
TemporaryBackfill: Allow store:Read on store/customer-records/* until 2026-06-30.
Fictional sample · Exact source context stays attached.
An output you can inspect
See how a finding keeps supporting evidence, conflicting evidence, and open questions together. Fictional data, no email gate.
Download the sample briefThe sample is illustrative, not a security assessment or proof of a real deployment.
Tell us what you are reviewing. We’ll reply by email to discuss a walkthrough.
Request a walkthroughGet occasional product updates, release announcements, and invitations to try new features.