Chapter 48 — Evidence dossier
Lesson map
Lesson 48 published. Map, example, EX142.
flowchart TD
N0["Learning outcomes"]
N1["48.1 What goes in the dossier"]
N2["48.2 Integrity"]
N3["48.3 Investigating the mismatch"]
N4["48.4 Lessons"]
N5["Lab — Verifying dossier evidence against its manifes"]
N6["Synthesis"]
N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4 --> N5 --> N6
N6 --> EX["Worked example"]
EX --> Q["Exercise EX142"]
Logical drawing
flowchart LR
N0["Learning outcomes"]
N1["48.1 What goes in the dossier"]
N2["48.2 Integrity"]
N3["48.3 Investigating the mismatch"]
N4["48.4 Lessons"]
N5["Lab — Verifying dossier evidence against its manifes"]
N6["Synthesis"]
N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4 --> N5 --> N6 --> Q["EX142"]
[Learning outcomes]
|
v
[48.1 What goes in the dossier]
|
v
[48.2 Integrity]
|
v
[48.3 Investigating the mismatch]
|
v
[48.4 Lessons]
|
v
[Lab — Verifying dossier evidence against its manifes]
|
v
[Synthesis]
|
v
[Worked example] --> [Exercise EX142]
Learning outcomes
You will (1) assemble evidence for accountability; (2) protect evidence integrity; (3) handle discrepancies honestly.
48.1 What goes in the dossier
Zara assembles an evidence dossier for her final assessment and for Pellmore's accountability. It contains the DPIA, the record of processing generated from configuration, erasure test logs, the breach exercise report and the retention monitoring report. Each item shows that a control exists and works. She organises the dossier by GDPR principle and requirement, so that an auditor can trace from a legal duty to the evidence that Pellmore meets it. Accountability under Article 5(2) depends on such evidence being complete and trustworthy.
48.2 Integrity
To show that evidence has not been altered, Zara records a SHA-256 digest of each file in a manifest when the dossier is approved. Later, the lab recomputes the digests. Four files match. The erasure test log does not: it now says four of five stores deleted, while the approved version said five of five. Someone edited the log after the manifest was signed. The mismatch does not tell Zara who changed the file or why, but it proves that the file differs from the approved evidence.
48.3 Investigating the mismatch
Zara investigates. The engineer responsible explains that a rerun after a vendor change showed one store failing, and he updated the log to reflect reality, without creating a new version. The new result is important: erasure is currently incomplete. Zara records both versions, opens a defect for the failing store and updates the manifest through the proper approval process. She notes that the integrity check did its job: it surfaced a silent change, which turned out to reveal a real problem rather than misconduct.
48.4 Lessons
Zara writes lessons. Evidence must be versioned, not overwritten; changes must create new entries with dates and reasons; and integrity checks should run regularly, not only at audits. She also notes that honesty about failing evidence is essential: a dossier that hid the failing store would mislead Pellmore and its patients. Prof. Holm adds that a dossier is not a showcase but a record, and that its value comes from being trustworthy, including when it shows problems. Problems found make the dossier credible.
Lab — Verifying dossier evidence against its manifest
# Evidence dossier: recompute SHA-256 digests and compare with the recorded manifest.
import hashlib
files = {"dpia_v3.md": b"DPIA v3 approved", "ropa.csv": b"flow,purpose,basis\n", "erasure_test.log": b"5/5 stores deleted",
"breach_drill.md": b"drill 2026-03", "retention_report.txt": b"total past retention: 0"}
manifest = {n: hashlib.sha256(b).hexdigest() for n, b in files.items()}
files["erasure_test.log"] = b"4/5 stores deleted" # edited after the manifest was signed
for n, b in files.items():
ok = hashlib.sha256(b).hexdigest() == manifest[n]
print(f"{n:22s} {'OK' if ok else 'MISMATCH'}")
Run with python3 lab_dossier.py. Verified output:
dpia_v3.md OK
ropa.csv OK
erasure_test.log MISMATCH
breach_drill.md OK
retention_report.txt OK
Worked example
Zara's manifest check finds erasure_test.log changed from five to four stores deleted; she investigates, records both versions, opens a defect and fixes the evidence process.
Synthetic case. Files and the edit are synthetic; GDPR Article 5(2) is real.
Errors and limits
Digests detect change, not truth; a correct-looking file can still describe a wrong test.
Exercises
- EX142 — Mismatched file. Which file failed the integrity check? Rubric: 3 = erasure_test.log;; 2 = names erasure log;; 1 = vague;; 0 = none.
- EX143 — What the mismatch shows. What does a digest mismatch prove and not prove? Rubric: 3 = the file changed since approval; not who changed it or why;; 2 = one part;; 1 = proves fraud;; 0 = none.
- EX144 — Evidence lesson. What process lesson follows from the mismatch? Rubric: 3 = version evidence instead of overwriting, with dates and reasons;; 2 = mentions versions;; 1 = vague;; 0 = none.
Synthesis
Chapter 48 assembles trustworthy evidence. Chapter 49 writes the thesis.
Continue studying — chapter 48 of 50
← Chapter 47 (draft) · Course chapter index · Chapter 49 (draft) →