Skip to content
KYXFIThe compliance and evidence layer for tokenized assets.Guided Demo

Architecture & Pilot

A chain-aware evidence layer, built for controlled evaluation.

KYXFI separates the rule owner, issuer claims, technical observation and assessment record so each source and limitation can be inspected.

Architecture

How the layers connect

Authority / rule owner
Issuer declaration
KYXFI assessment layer
Chain adapter + evidence references
Verification record
Relying parties / reviewers
Responsibility

Authority

Defines and approves the rule profile; makes official regulatory decisions.

Responsibility

Issuer

Submits claims, disclosures and supporting evidence.

Responsibility

KYXFI

Correlates evidence, checks configured technical conditions, records gaps, conflicts and history.

Responsibility

Chain adapter

Retrieves only supported public on-chain facts. EVM-first for the initial technical demo; designed to permit future non-EVM adapters.

Responsibility

Reviewer / relying party

Interprets the record with its limitations under their own policy.

Data boundary

What stays off-chain

Sensitive documents normally stay off-chain in controlled storage. Commitments/hashes and minimal references may be anchored where appropriate after threat and privacy review. A hash is integrity evidence, not truth.

Pilot proposal

A narrow, testable first pilot

  1. One asset class
  2. One approved/illustrative rule profile
  3. One EVM network
  4. Limited technical checks
  5. Positive and negative test cases
  6. Jointly agreed acceptance criteria

Success criteria

  • Issuer declaration is structured
  • Changes to committed declaration are detectable
  • Declared contract is compared with deployment
  • Missing/conflicting evidence is surfaced
  • Record is reproducible and auditable
  • Material implementation/admin changes trigger reassessment

Negative test cases

  • Address mismatch
  • Implementation changed
  • Missing audit evidence
  • Stale source
  • Unsupported chain
  • Unverified issuer claim

Open questions

Questions for an authority

  • Which asset class should the pilot cover?
  • Which rules can be made machine-readable?
  • Which independent sources are acceptable?
  • Which checks are deterministic vs human review?
  • Who can issue official status?
  • What is public vs restricted?
  • How are rule changes and versioning handled?
  • Is there an appropriate sandbox or controlled pilot process?

No authority, including IFSCA, has reviewed or accepted this proposal.