This document was generated using AI and has yet to be human reviewed
Compliance Checks
Validation Layer — Formal verification of specification conformance
Definition
Compliance checks are formal processes that verify whether an implementation meets specification requirements. Unlike test suites (which verify specific behaviors), compliance checks provide systematic, comprehensive assessment of conformance—often with certification implications.
Relationship to the Specification
The specification defines the requirements. Compliance checks provide structured evaluation of whether those requirements are met, typically with:
- Checklists derived from specification requirements
- Pass/fail criteria for each requirement
- Evidence documentation for conformance claims
- Gap analysis for non-conformance
| Specification Section | Compliance Check |
|---|---|
| ”All messages SHALL be signed” | ☐ Verify signature present on all message types |
| ”Connections SHALL timeout after 30s” | ☐ Verify timeout behavior under test conditions |
| ”Implementations MUST support TLS 1.3” | ☐ Verify TLS negotiation and cipher suites |
Types of Compliance
Self-Assessment
Internal evaluation against specification:
- Development team runs compliance checklist
- Identifies gaps before release
- Documents conformance status
Peer Review
External evaluation by specification community:
- Other implementers verify claims
- Interoperability testing across implementations
- Identifies specification ambiguities
Formal Certification
Authoritative conformance verification:
- Official test suite execution
- Documentation review
- Certification granted on pass
Dependency Chain
Specification
↓
Test Suites ← executable tests for requirements
↓
Compliance Checks ← systematic conformance verification
↓
Audit Trails ← evidence of compliance
↓
Changelogs ← track compliance across versions
Why Spec-Grounding Matters
Compliance without clear specification grounding becomes subjective:
- Ambiguous requirements: What does “should support” mean for compliance?
- Incomplete evaluation: Compliance checks that miss specification requirements
- Inconsistent standards: Different evaluators reach different conclusions
- Certification theater: Passing checks that don’t verify real conformance
Compliance Checklist Structure
Effective compliance checklists trace directly to specification:
# Compliance Checklist: SPEC v2.1
## Section 3: Message Format
### SPEC-3.1 Message Structure
| ID | Requirement | Type | Status | Evidence |
|----|-------------|------|--------|----------|
| 3.1.1 | Message contains valid header | MUST | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail | |
| 3.1.2 | Header includes version field | MUST | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail | |
| 3.1.3 | Version field is 2 bytes | MUST | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail | |
| 3.1.4 | Implementations support v1 messages | SHOULD | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail ☐ N/A | |
### SPEC-3.2 Signatures
| ID | Requirement | Type | Status | Evidence |
|----|-------------|------|--------|----------|
| 3.2.1 | All messages are signed | MUST | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail | |
| 3.2.2 | Ed25519 signatures accepted | MUST | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail | |
| 3.2.3 | Invalid signatures rejected | MUST | ☐ Pass ☐ Fail | |RFC 2119 Keywords and Compliance
Specifications often use RFC 2119 keywords. Compliance implications:
| Keyword | Compliance Requirement |
|---|---|
| MUST / SHALL | Required for compliance; failure = non-conformant |
| MUST NOT / SHALL NOT | Prohibited; presence = non-conformant |
| SHOULD / RECOMMENDED | Expected; absence requires justification |
| SHOULD NOT | Discouraged; presence requires justification |
| MAY / OPTIONAL | No compliance requirement; implementation choice |
Compliance Evidence
Claims require evidence:
## Compliance Evidence: SPEC-4.2.3 (Delivery Timeout)
**Requirement**: Messages SHALL be delivered within 500ms under normal
network conditions.
**Test Method**:
1. Established connection between two nodes
2. Sent 1000 messages under controlled conditions
3. Measured delivery latency for each
**Results**:
- Mean latency: 127ms
- 95th percentile: 312ms
- 99th percentile: 445ms
- Maximum: 478ms
**Status**: PASS
**Evidence**: Test logs attached (test_delivery_latency_20240115.log)Best Practices
- Derive compliance checklists directly from specification sections
- Use RFC 2119 keyword interpretation consistently
- Require evidence (test results, logs, documentation) for compliance claims
- Version compliance checklists with specification versions
- Document partial compliance clearly (which requirements pass, which fail)
- Include interoperability testing with other implementations
- Re-evaluate compliance when specifications are updated