Technology claims sit in every data room: the product uses proprietary AI, the distributed code contains no copyleft components, personal data stays in a given region. They are usually checked through questionnaires, management interviews and, at best, a review of a source code snapshot. Nothing in that process checks that what the target actually ships matches what it says.
Claim first
AnKre starts from the claim, not from the software. The analyst selects the technology claims that matter to the deal, and each check is scoped to answer one of them. The result is recorded like any other evidence: a graded statement attached to the claim, with its origin, which then supports, contradicts or leaves the claim unresolved.
Safeguards that come before any analysis
- Written authorisation from the rights holder and an agreed scope before any artefact is examined.
- Static analysis only, in an isolated environment with no network access during the analysis.
- Third-party software is inventoried, not analysed beyond what the claim requires.
- Analysis is reproducible: the same artefact and the same tools give the same evidence.
- AI models see structured observations only, never the raw artefact.
- A reviewer judges every result before it reaches a finding.
What can be examined
The checks cover the forms in which software is actually delivered: web applications, mobile applications, desktop applications and compiled binaries. The scope of each check is set by the claim and the authorisation, not by what is technically possible.
Why it belongs in the same platform
A technology finding is only useful if it sits next to the others: the commercial claim that the technology supports, the legal claim about licences, the cyber review. Because the results are claims and evidence in the same knowledge graph, the technology workstream feeds the same review queue, the same deliverables and the same audit trail as every other workstream.