> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://docs.cortex.aic.io/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://docs.cortex.aic.io/sources-and-evidence/source-authority.md).

# Source Authority

**Open this area:** In the CORTEX menu, select **Sources & evidence → Sources**.

Retain the accountable human review of purpose, permitted operations, exact requirements, restrictions, and validity before tasking or acquisition.

**Who uses this:** Reviewer, Collector, Administrator\
**Open in CORTEX:** `/sources`\
**In-app guide:** `/help?topic=source-authority`

**Expected result:** A current source revision records the reviewed scope for the proposed new use.

## Before you start

* Hold explicit source-authority review permission with current source and Direction read access in the workspace.
* Inspect the real policy, licence, consent, or other authority and any source-protection restrictions.
* Use an active source whose handling covers the exact current requirements selected for use.

## What to do

{% stepper %}
{% step %}

### Inspect the source

Open the source detail and examine provenance, restrictions, reliability, and history.

If source details need correction, have an authorised editor amend them before reviewing authority; ordinary amendments remove authority from the new revision.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

### Set the permitted scope

Expand **Review authority for new use** and select the independently approved authority case for this source. Its reviewed processing purpose, requirements, operations, and dates carry into the attestation.

Complete permitted use/methods, restrictions, collection discipline, and source control category.

Unknown categories or an unlinked attestation cannot support new tasking or ingestion.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

### Bind the question and operation

Use **Search requirements** and **Add requirement** for each permitted exact version.

Select collection tasking, new material ingestion, or both as authorised; set the UTC start and expiry to cover the intended operation.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

### Record the human decision

Use **Authority**, **Requirements**, and **Review** to record the actual permission, restrictions, exact requirement versions, explicit attestation, and reason.

**Continue** validates the current step; **Back** or a completed step returns without saving. **Record authority review** is the only retained action.

Check the newly retained source version before selecting it in Collection or Ingest.
{% endstep %}

{% step %}

### Reassess later use

If permission is withdrawn, record the reason and select **Withdraw authority for new use**.

Changed requirements, source amendments, expiry, or withdrawal require a fresh appropriate review before new use; old observations are not retrospectively approved or erased.
{% endstep %}
{% endstepper %}

## Check the result

* Does the reference actually permit this purpose and method?
* Are the selected requirement versions current?
* Is the intended operation explicitly permitted?
* Does validity cover the task window or acquisition time and present use?
* Have source protection, privacy, and licensing restrictions been considered?

## If you get stuck

<details>

<summary>Why did a source edit remove usable authority?</summary>

Changed provenance or restrictions require reconsideration. Review the new active source revision and deliberately select it for new work; historical approvals stay attached to their earlier revision.

</details>

<details>

<summary>Why does an old plan fail after its requirement changed?</summary>

The plan pins the earlier question. Obtain authority for the current requirement and create a new appropriate plan; the old plan cannot silently acquire a new purpose.

</details>

<details>

<summary>Can I still inspect material after authority expires?</summary>

Historical reading continues under its existing access and handling rules. Expiry or withdrawal prevents new use covered by these gates; it does not rewrite retained evidence or grant access to it.

</details>

## Responsibility and limits

* The accountable reviewer verifies substantive authority and qualifications with the proper legal, policy, or command owner.
* Public availability is not unrestricted-use permission. Source-use review is neither release approval nor a handling downgrade.

**Reference and scope:** JDP 2-00 (4th ed.), 4.7–4.8 and 4.36–4.45 inform restrictions on source use. A recorded reference is an attestation, not automated legal validation.

## Related workflows

* [Record and review external collection authority](broken://pages/6ee09de85e92ae4a794e9d32bf4823984218f6d6)
* [Record processing purposes and privacy applicability](file:///7397340/assurance/processing-activities.md)
* [Plan collection and record observed results](broken://pages/9f06f9da6d83f0fc97ab65193a28eb4d7165788c)
* [Preserve an original and review processing](broken://pages/0013ee41e1cac5e736e1d2d9f16ed6ce5675a80c)
* [Manage accounts, grants and workspace membership](file:///7397340/assurance/access.md)