VELARU GALACTIC EXHIBIT PACK — FINANCIAL CRIME / AML
Jurisdiction: China (cn)
Modality: Text / Chat
Program: Velaru Financial Crime / AML · China (galactic_financial_crime_cn)
Product ID: financial_crime:cn:bundle:text
Vertical: financial_crime
Generated: 2026-08-15T13:25:59.738819Z
Authority: China CAC Algorithm Filing Pack — AML AI Decision + SAR Audit Pack
Deadline: CAC algorithm filing + PIPL
Velaru verify: https://velaru-erra.onrender.com/verify

EXHIBIT A — AI INVENTORY
[]

EXHIBIT B — GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK
{
  "framework": "Velaru Mandate Registry \u2014 Financial Crime / AML",
  "exhibit_authority": "China CAC Algorithm Filing Pack \u2014 AML AI Decision + SAR Audit Pack",
  "regulatory_frameworks": [
    "BSA",
    "FinCEN SAR obligations",
    "FATF Recommendation 16",
    "CAC Generative AI Measures",
    "PIPL",
    "DSL",
    "Algorithm Recommendation Rules"
  ],
  "standards_alignment": [
    "POSS-2",
    "DRP-1",
    "TCB",
    "FRE 707 pre-compliance",
    "ISO 42001"
  ],
  "human_oversight": "clear transaction / file SAR",
  "third_party_verification": "https://velaru-erra.onrender.com/verify (operator-independent)",
  "data_lineage": "Hash-chained Ed25519 receipts; optional RFC3161 + external anchor",
  "mirror_trap": "Banks using AI for AML while unable to produce per-decision audit for examiners \u2014 same record-keeping failure. \u00b7 Algorithm filing requires decision logic documentation \u2014 independent verify acceptable to CAC review.",
  "chain_integrity": {
    "depth": 1,
    "invariant_holds": true
  }
}

EXHIBIT D — DATA INPUTS & VALIDATION
{
  "data_validation_method": "Cryptographic receipt per AI decision; public verify without trusting deployer, vendor, or Velaru operator",
  "bias_testing_proxy": "Asymmetry score from live chain signals",
  "model_change_control": "Policy lock registry \u2014 criteria hash frozen pre-dispute",
  "logging_retention": "90-day pre-dispute window minimum; permanent verify permalinks",
  "external_validator": "Nisaba LLC / Velaru",
  "validator_independence": "Client-side Ed25519 verify; BYOK tri-receipt optional",
  "headline_stat": "CFPB $59M Upstart fine \u2014 could not prove fair lending AI compliance",
  "global_leaders_addressed": [
    "FinCEN",
    "HSBC",
    "JPMorgan",
    "Chainalysis",
    "OFAC",
    "CAC",
    "Tencent",
    "Alibaba"
  ]
}

MIRROR TRAP (regulatory insight)
Banks using AI for AML while unable to produce per-decision audit for examiners — same record-keeping failure. · Algorithm filing requires decision logic documentation — independent verify acceptable to CAC review.

NERVE CARDS — WHY GLOBAL LEADERS CARE
[
  {
    "title": "SAR explainability",
    "body": "Examiner asks why alert cleared \u2014 without receipt, bank pays fine regardless of actual SAR filing.",
    "source": "vertical"
  },
  {
    "title": "Vendor model drift",
    "body": "Third-party AML AI updates without bank validation = SR 11-7 violation.",
    "source": "vertical"
  },
  {
    "title": "Cross-border",
    "body": "FATF Rec 16 travel rule + AI screening = multi-jurisdiction receipt requirement.",
    "source": "vertical"
  },
  {
    "title": "[China] Dual compliance",
    "body": "Multinationals operating CN + US/EU \u2014 one architecture, jurisdiction-tagged receipts.",
    "source": "jurisdiction"
  },
  {
    "title": "[China] DeepSeek moment",
    "body": "Chinese model deployment globally \u2014 provenance receipt links model to decision.",
    "source": "jurisdiction"
  },
  {
    "title": "[Text / Chat] Modality hook",
    "body": "Baseline \u2014 all frameworks apply to text decisions.",
    "source": "modality"
  }
]

BOOK SUMMARY: {
  "total_insureds": 0,
  "compliant": 0,
  "grace_period": 0,
  "non_compliant": 0,
  "expired": 0,
  "not_enrolled": 0,
  "compliant_pct": 0.0
}

TAM / EXPOSURE: $2B+ annual AML fines · AI false positive/negative disputes
INSURANCE LINES: Financial institution E&O, Crime, Regulatory defense

DISCLAIMER: External validation evidence pack — not legal advice, not filed rate approval.