Court-ready evidence you can verify without the vendor.

First, which TrueScreen are you researching?

If you searched for TrueScreen reviews and landed on pages about drug testing and employment verification, you were reading about a different company. Two unrelated businesses share the name.

The practical consequence: there is no independent review corpus for the evidence product. Buyer research has to be done against documentation and output, which is what the rest of this page does.

The question to ask any evidence vendor: who has to be alive for this to be verified?

Litigation is slow. A dispute opened today can be tried in three years and appealed for another two. The useful test of an evidence product is not how it looks the day it is created, it is what a sceptical expert can do with it years later.

A qualified eIDAS timestamp is genuinely strong on this point, and both products issue one. A qualified token can be validated by any eIDAS validator against the EU Trusted List, without the issuing platform. Credit where it is due: that part of TrueScreen's output is not vendor-locked.

ProofSnap adds two layers on top of it, and this is the real difference:

• A public blockchain anchor with no trust anchor at all. On Professional and higher, the manifest hash is stamped through OpenTimestamps into the Bitcoin blockchain and stored as manifest.json.ots. Verifying it requires no certificate authority, no trusted list and no surviving company. It requires the Bitcoin chain.
• The verifier travels with the evidence. Every package contains verification/verify.sh and verify.ps1. They parse the manifest at run time, re-hash every file, check their own integrity and print a verdict. They run offline, on a machine with no ProofSnap installed, on an air-gapped forensic workstation if that is what your expert insists on. The browser-based Trust Verifier is published under the MIT licence for anyone who prefers a UI.

TrueScreen delivers a structured report as PDF and JSON with its forensic logs. That is a good deliverable for a reviewer. It is not the same thing as a package that re-verifies itself with a script you can read in a text editor.

To be precise about where our own data goes: ProofSnap builds the package in your browser, and the timestamping services receive only a SHA-256 hash, never the content. The one exception is C2PA signing, which sends the screenshot to the signing service. Our services run on AWS in us-east-2, not in the European Union. If EU-only processing is a procurement requirement, see the honest disclosure further down this page.

What a court actually asks of a web capture

Two questions decide admissibility almost everywhere: is the content unaltered, and is the date trustworthy. The legal instruments differ, the questions do not.

In United States federal court, a capture is authenticated under FRE 901 and can be self-authenticating under FRE 902(13), a record produced by an accurate electronic process, and FRE 902(14), a copy authenticated by a hash value. ProofSnap packages include a rule_902_certification.pdf template that fills in every technical fact and leaves the declarant identity, qualifications and signature blank, because the declaration has to be subscribed by a human under penalty of perjury under 28 U.S.C. 1746. It is a template, never a claim.

In the European Union, Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 carries the weight. Article 41 gives a qualified electronic timestamp a presumption of accuracy of date and time and of integrity of the linked data, recognised in all 27 member states. Article 42 sets the technical requirements. That presumption shifts the burden: you stop having to prove the date, and the other side has to rebut it.

A ProofSnap package answers both questions with artifacts rather than assertions:

• Integrity. manifest.json with a SHA-256 hash of every file, manifest.sig with an RSA-4096 signature, publickey.pem to check it.
• Trustworthy date. The eIDAS qualified token in manifest.json.tsr with eidas_validation.json for offline long-term validation, and the Bitcoin anchor in manifest.json.ots.
• Process. forensic_log.json with a tamper-evident hash chain and chain_of_custody.json in an ISO/IEC 27037 style, including NTP-verified time, DNS cross-verification, WHOIS and TLS, plus disclosure of every layout change made during capture.

The same package is built to travel: art. 2712 of the Italian Codice civile, which is the frame TrueScreen's home market argues in, section 371a ZPO in Germany, art. 1366 of the French Code civil, and arts. 299.2, 326 and 384 of the Spanish Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil. See our eIDAS qualified timestamps page for the mechanics.

This is general information, not legal advice. Consult your counsel on matter-specific admissibility strategy.

What is in a ProofSnap evidence ZIP

TrueScreen delivers a report as PDF and JSON. ProofSnap delivers the raw artifacts plus the means to check them, 11 to 15 files depending on plan.

Frequently asked questions

Pricing structure, vendor independence and legal framing are covered in the sections above.