The parts of an age assurance system

What the clause says

The framework builds an age assurance system from one or more assurance components plus a processing sub-system. The components produce the age attribute; the sub-system combines, checks and delivers it.

What it supplies to a comparison

This is the boundary you draw before comparing anything. A test of a component is not a test of a system, and a system result cannot be attributed to one component unless the sub-system is held constant.

Evidence to keep

• The system boundary diagram, naming each component and the processing sub-system.
• A component inventory with the supplier, version and role of each part.

What the evidence looks like

For 4.1, the first artefact is The system boundary diagram, naming each component and the processing sub-system.. The second is A component inventory with the supplier, version and role of each part.. If 4.1 has no first artefact, the practice is unproven at 4.1, and the report should record the absence rather than infer the practice from a policy.

Questions for the provider

1. Which parts of this system are inside the comparison, and which are outside?
2. If a component changes, does the comparison still describe the same object?

How it connects to the draft

The parts of an age assurance system belongs to 4 characterisation, and it gives the analysis one fixed point: This is the boundary you draw before comparing anything. A test of a component is not a test of a system, and a system result cannot be attributed to . A comparison that cannot place a result against 4.1 is measuring something the framework has not defined, and the report should say so.

In the register, 4.1 is read beside the unit that tests it, and where it sets an objective rather than a number, that unit turns the objective into a question and an evidence artefact.