h33-submission · v0.1.0 · released 2026-06-04 · Layer 3 vertical #2

Submission + bundle + attestation + Portability Verifier — four artifacts agree without contacting H33.

Q: How does this differ from Verification, HATS, and Agent-008?

H33-74 produces the submission artifact. Verification renders the independent replay verdict on it. HATS records and monitors controls over time and does not produce this artifact. Agent-008 governs the AI agent decisions captured in the bundle and does not verify the submission.

This exists because evidence a regulator cannot independently re-verify is worthless: a Submission bundles the scope manifest, the H33-74 evidence bundle, the attestation, and a Portability Verifier so the recipient can confirm the facts offline, trusting no one.

"A regulator downloads Submission + Bundle + Attestation + Verifier and independently verifies the submission without contacting H33, the submitter, or any third-party vendor." — Eric, June 4 2026

A Portable Regulatory Submission is a firm-signed evidence artifact a regulator can independently verify offline — not a finding of compliance or regulatory approval, which remain the regulator's to determine. The TDA v0.1 release proved three artifacts agree without H33: bundle + attestation + Portability Verifier. This release adds a fourth: a firm-signed regulatory submission that binds a specific (regulator, inquiry, bundle, attestation, Portability Verifier) tuple at a specific moment in time. The regulator's submission verifier runs six structural checks; the TDA loop runs inside it. Same substrate. Same Q0/Q0.5. One new consumer class.

This is an Attestation & Receipts expression of H33-74, which produces the portable 74-byte post-quantum evidence primitive. It does not render the verdict (Verification), monitor controls (HATS), or govern the agent (Agent-008).

Constitutional invariants this release embodies

Q0 — Who bears risk? Never H33. The firm signs the transmittal. H33 is not in the submission path and hosts no submission registry.

Q0.5 — Who owns the judgment? Always the regulator. The submission verifier surfaces structural verdicts. It never asserts compliance, recommends action, or judges the firm's decisions.

Money quote — Submission ≠ Adjudication. Parallel to Attestation ≠ Underwriting. Submission is a structural act the firm performs against the regulator. Adjudication is the regulator's act. H33 ships infrastructure for the first; H33 does not participate in the second.

v0.1.0 release

⬇

h33-issue-submission-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin

size936,544 bytes · sha3-256d888e22bf26c61d5e9ca9a67c64f28cf070d76de3193a494f089cee8bd3819e3

Issuer ⬇

⬇

h33-verify-submission-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin

size820,672 bytes · sha3-256ac2f70c3d0af24d7c36e3da88d5bc3876a4bee3044e57c232d8f0f593d30bff9

Submission Verifier ⬇

{ }

scope-manifest-v1.schema.json

canonical JSON Schema for the scope manifest · publishable · alphabetical field order · determinism contract

Schema ⬇

{ }

sample-submission-claim-84711.regulatory_submission.json

a real signed submission against the canonical-continuity tenant · CFPB inquiry · 2 decisions · 51 KB

Sample ⬇

↺

sample-verify-output.txt

what the submission verifier prints when you run it against the sample — captured PASS output with embedded TDA loop verdicts

Output ⬇

≡

release_manifest.json

all hashes · substrate-reuse test · 6 checks · 5 consumption patterns · v0.2 deferrals

Manifest ⬇

≡

README.md

eleven-command quick start · how to issue your own · honest v0.1 caveats

README ⬇

The four-artifact loop, end to end

A regulator needs four downloads. Each comes from a different surface; together they prove agreement without H33, the submitter, or any third-party vendor.

1 · Submission

Firm-signed scope manifest

From this page (sample) or transmitted by the firm

2 · Bundle

Enterprise portability bundle

From /workspace/portability/ or transmitted by the firm

3 · Attestation

Signed tda_v1 JSON

From /attestation/ or transmitted by the firm

4 · Portability Verifier

Canonical-replay binary

From /verifier/

Run the loop

chmod +x h33-verify-submission-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin
chmod +x h33-verify-attestation-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin
chmod +x h33-independent-canonical-replay-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin

./h33-verify-submission-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin \
    --submission sample-submission-claim-84711.regulatory_submission.json \
    --bundle tenant_insurance_claim_44962d9b-25f5-5622-bd9a-98d5580bb8a2_enterprise_bundle.tar.gz \
    --attestation sample-attestation-claim-84711.tda_v1.json \
    --verifier-binary h33-independent-canonical-replay-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin \
    --attestation-verifier h33-verify-attestation-v0.1.0-aarch64-apple-darwin

Expected output — six checks (with the TDA loop running inside check 3)

1 ✓ Scope manifest PQ signatures verify + officer fingerprint internally consistent
2 ✓ Artifact hash anchors match (bundle · attestation · verifier · bundle size)
3 ✓ TDA loop verification PASS — delegates to h33-verify-attestation; bundle + attestation + verifier all agree
4 ✓ Every in-scope decision pinned as eligible in attestation
5 ✓ in_scope_ids structurally present in bundle (no scope smuggling)
6 ✓ scope_window consistent with bundle timeline (no time-window smuggling)
→ OVERALL: PASS ✓ — submission + bundle + attestation + verifier all agree. No H33 contact required.

Substrate-reuse claim — the platform argument

This release reuses the existing Bundle + Attestation + Portability Verifier triple unchanged. It adds two primitives: the scope manifest schema and the submission verifier binary. Constitutional layer Q0 + Q0.5 carries forward unchanged.

TDA proved the carrier consumption pattern (Layer 3 vertical #1). Regulatory Submission v0.1 proves the regulator consumption pattern (Layer 3 vertical #2). Same substrate. Same constitutional rules. Auditor (#3), Acquirer (#4), and Governance team (#5) are the next consumer classes — each will inherit the same Q0/Q0.5 and consume the same substrate.

When to use it — and when not to

Use this submission pair when a regulator has opened an inquiry and you must hand over evidence they can verify independently and offline — no live API, no trust in H33, no trust in the submitter. It is built for the moment the firm proves what was submitted and that the in-scope decisions replay to their canonical state.

Do not reach for it when you want a compliance verdict or an approval. A submission is portable evidence; it is not a finding of compliance and does not by itself constitute regulatory approval. That is adjudication — the regulator's act. For continuous control monitoring use HATS; to govern the AI agent's decisions use Agent-008; for the independent replay verdict see Verification.

The five questions this page answers

1 · What is it? A portable evidence artifact H33-74 produces — a firm-signed scope manifest binding a regulator inquiry to a specific bundle, attestation, and verifier.
2 · What it does NOT do. No compliance verdict (that is Verification), no monitoring (that is HATS), no governance decision (that is Agent-008). Not regulatory approval.
3 · Different from Verification? H33-74 produces the submission; Verification renders the independent PASS/FAIL verdict on it.
4 · Independently verified how? The regulator re-runs the checks offline against the published scope-manifest-v1 schema and the anchored hashes — trusting no one.
5 · When to use it? Whenever you need portable, offline-verifiable evidence of a submission that survives infrastructure, vendor risk, and time.

Frequently asked questions

Does a passing submission mean the firm is compliant or approved?

No. A PASS from the submission verifier is a structural verdict — signatures verify, hash anchors match, in-scope decisions are pinned, the bundle replays to its canonical state. It is portable evidence a regulator can independently verify. It does not by itself constitute regulatory approval, a compliance finding, or a legal conclusion. Adjudication is the regulator's act; H33 ships infrastructure for the submission but does not participate in the adjudication.

How is it verified without contacting H33?

The regulator downloads the four artifacts and runs the submission verifier locally. It re-checks the post-quantum signatures, re-computes the artifact hash anchors, and delegates the bundle+attestation+verifier replay to the attestation verifier — all offline against the published schema. Nothing in the loop calls H33, the submitter, or any third-party vendor. The cryptography (post-quantum signatures, SHA3, JCS canonicalization) are external standards the substrate uses, not H33 inventions.

How does this differ from Verification, HATS, and Agent-008?

H33-74 produces the submission artifact. Verification renders the independent replay verdict on it. HATS records and monitors controls over time and does not produce this artifact. Agent-008 governs the AI agent decisions captured in the bundle and does not verify the submission.

Honest v0.2 deferrals

Multi-platform binaries (linux x86_64 · aarch64 · darwin x86_64)
PQ-signed RELEASE artifacts (release signing key ceremony required)
Production firm-side signing key ceremony (v0.1 uses dev keypair per --signing-key-dir)
Byte-deterministic builds across machines (containerized toolchain)
Submission revocation registry
Supplemental + correction submission workflow detail (supersedes/supplements fields exist; semantics await v0.2)
Multi-regulator harmonization conventions (portal adapters, schema mappings)
Regulator-facing UX beyond the CLI submission verifier
Workspace UI surface for the regulatory_submission event in the firm's Twin
CI/CD release automation