40 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
40 lines
1.7 KiB
Plaintext
---
|
|
title: Policy Evidence
|
|
slug: en/docs/policy-evidence
|
|
description: How Tenantial frames policy evidence as readable review context and why evidence should be more than a loose collection of screenshots or exports.
|
|
editUrl: false
|
|
lastUpdated: false
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
In Tenantial, evidence is not decorative output. It is the part of the review story that makes clear what a finding, exception, or decision is actually grounded in.
|
|
|
|
## What this page covers
|
|
|
|
- what policy evidence means in the public Tenantial context
|
|
- how known states, observations, and review questions are tied together
|
|
- why evidence should not be mistaken for broad proof guarantees
|
|
|
|
## What evidence means here
|
|
|
|
Policy evidence ties together known configuration states, relevant changes, and explanatory context. Its job is to stabilize review conversations, not to dump raw material without framing.
|
|
|
|
## What reviewers should be able to read from it
|
|
|
|
- which known state acts as the reference point
|
|
- which observations or differences matter for the current question
|
|
- how findings, accepted risks, and next steps connect back to that basis
|
|
|
|
## Why this matters for buyers
|
|
|
|
When evidence only exists as a folder of screenshots, the next decision stays unclear. A readable evidence base shortens conversations between delivery, security, management, and audit stakeholders.
|
|
|
|
## Boundaries of this page
|
|
|
|
This page does not promise gapless or court-proof proof. It only explains how Tenantial frames evidence in its public product narrative as a review aid.
|
|
|
|
## Related links
|
|
|
|
- [Drift detection](/en/docs/drift-detection/)
|
|
- [Review packs & decisions](/en/docs/review-packs-decisions/)
|
|
- [Findings, exceptions & accepted risk](/en/docs/findings-exceptions-accepted-risk/)
|
|
- [Review packs](/en/platform/review-packs) |