How We Audit Signatures
Version 2.0.0 · Effective 2026-07-07
When a third party pastes a 12-character Verification ID, the 32-character SHA-256 prefix printed on the signed PDF, or the full 64-character SHA-256 hash from the Certificate of Completion into the public verify page, SignFile answers the only question that matters in a dispute: is this exact byte sequence the document Ilxonwat produced and bound to its listed signers at the stated time?. The full method is below.
1. Hashing — what we compare
Every signed PDF is hashed with SHA-256 at the moment its last signer signs. The hash is the document's unique fingerprint; changing a single byte — adding a watermark, swapping a signature image, even an invisible edit — produces a completely different digest.
That hash is the row's primary key in the signed-documents registry. Verification is therefore a literal equivalence check, not an inference: either the 64-character SHA-256 matches a row in the registry, or it does not.
2. What the verification verdict reveals
When a match is found, the verify page exposes the following public-tier facts only — and nothing more (per the E-B10 2026-06-30 privacy decision):
- Document title (as supplied by the sender at the time of dispatch)
- Sender's display name (the workspace owner — no email, no user id)
- For each signer: their display name, whether they are the owner or a counterparty, and a timestamp
- The full SHA-256 hash
- Page count and file size of the signed PDF
- Wall-clock completion timestamp
The verify page deliberately does not expose emails, IP addresses, user agents, or the signer's individual IP-captured audit trail. Those rows live in the sender's account on a higher privilege tier (workspace admin or owner) and are exported only via the GDPR data-export endpoint per a data-subject access request.
3. What the verification verdict does NOT prove
The verdict answers byte identity and signer-bound continuity. It does not on its own:
- Confirm the signer's real-world identity (SignFile does not perform KYC; signer identity is self-asserted at the email layer)
- Prove the signer's device was uncompromised at the moment of signing
- Prove the document's contents reflected the parties' intent outside the system (signers are responsible for reviewing what they sign)
Where a higher evidentiary standard is required (financial, healthcare, regulated-industry contracts), parties should pair the SHA-256 with their existing notarization or identity-verification process. SignFile produces the audit-grade artifact; legal interpretation of that artifact is the parties' responsibility.
4. The audit log (private to the sender)
Every event that affects the document's lifecycle is timestamped and recorded in the sender's account:
- Created — when the sender finished placing fields, setters, and recipients.
- Sent — when the dispatch email(s) queued.
- Opened — when a signer first loaded the signing page (no value here; this is engagement signal, not consent).
- Consent given — when the signer ticked the ESIGN/UECA consent checkbox before applying their signature.
- Signed / declined — the actual binding event, captured with timestamp + (subject to privacy hardening) IP + user agent.
- Stamped — when the PDF was rewritten to embed the signature image.
- Certificate downloaded / email delivered / void requested / void executed — operational events around the document's post-signing handling.
These rows never leak to the public verify view; they are the sender's evidentiary record. A printed Cert of Completion is delivered alongside the completion email and to the owner's account, and includes a SHA-256 anchor that the sender can re-verify against this same registry at any time.
5. Dispute posture
If a signer claims they did not sign, or a recipient claims the document was altered after signing, the third party's standing position is:
- Re-pull the SHA-256 from the saved/printed signed PDF and paste it into the verify page — equivalence confirms the document has not been altered.
- Compare the public signer list (name + signed_at) to the contractually-named recipients — continuity confirms the right parties signed.
- Request the sender's audit log via the sender (it is theirs to release; third parties do not have access to the IP-level audit trail).
Adversaries must break SHA-256 (cryptographically infeasible at the date of this page), or convince a sender to release the document from a workspace that has not been compromised by an IP-class attacker. SignFile does not promise either is impossible; the system is built to make both detectable.
6. Boundaries, honestly
SignFile is a SaaS tool, not a court. The legal force of a SignFile signature is whatever the jurisdiction's electronic signature law (ESIGN, UECA, eIDAS, ITA 2000, etc.) gives it. SignFile's job is to make the artifact the law asks for — a tamper-evident, signer-bound, time-stamped document with a one-way cryptographic hash — and to keep the public registry open to anyone with the document.
If anything on this page reads like an over-claim, that's a bug. Email support@signfile.io and we'll fix it.