Every claim, defensible by primary source.
When we get it wrong, we publish the correction with the rule citation that drove the change. When the rule is silent and practitioners diverge, we publish the question. On the highest-stakes questions, we file the letter and publish the response.
The Audit Defense Library is a tech-compliance authority library for CISOs, compliance directors, and senior GRC practitioners. Authority in this field is earned by being right about the rule and honest about where the rule is not yet settled. Every regulatory claim on this site traces to a primary source. NIST publications, AICPA Trust Services Criteria, 45 CFR Part 164, the EU AI Act, FedRAMP RFCs and Notices, DFARS clauses. When training memory and the primary source diverge, the primary source wins.
Public accounting firms request interpretive guidance from the SEC in writing and publish the request openly. The discipline is older than the library. We borrowed it.
When we got it wrong
6 substantive corrections to published articles, each with the verified primary-source citation that drove the change.
Read the log →Where the rule is silent
5 regulatory questions where the controlling rule does not resolve and practitioner positions split. Our reading, the dissenting view, and the question we would file with the authority. 2 questions have guidance-request letters drafted and pending filing.
View the questions →Found something we got wrong?
Found a citation that does not trace to the source? Have a regulatory question the published rule does not resolve? Tell us. Reader submissions feed both the Corrections log and the Open Questions queue. We acknowledge within 5 business days.
Submit a question or correction →We read the rule first.
The library runs ongoing content integrity audits across every published article. The first full sweep in May 2026 surfaced citations at the wrong subsection, vendor statistics framed as authoritative when the underlying report did not contain the figure, and a handful of stale regulatory references that had been superseded since publication.
We corrected what was wrong. For the rest, where common practice and the rule diverge or where the rule itself is silent, we built this page. The divergence is public. The rule is named. Practice is labeled as practice. The judgment is the reader\'s.
If you find something we got wrong, tell us. Email info@josefkamara.com or use the Ask Us form.