AEQUITAS NEXUS
Fictional PQC supplier decision record
Educational demonstration | 16 October 2026 | Unreviewed

All organisations, records, facts and owner roles below are invented.
This is a teaching example, not a readiness assessment, certification,
technical implementation plan or contract recommendation.

1. OBJECTIVE
Organisation A needs a defensible next step on a proposed 36-month
renewal with Supplier B. Renewal is due in 60 days.

2. REQUIREMENTS
Business continuity and appropriate confidentiality are required.
A ten-year confidentiality need is an assumption to verify with the
data owner. Identify the applicable guidance and contract obligations.
ASD milestones are planning recommendations; no universal legal
deadline is assumed by this example.

3. EVIDENCE
E01: A brochure says "quantum ready". It establishes a claim, not readiness.
E03: A roadmap proposes an ML-KEM preview in 2027. It records an intention,
     not a supported production commitment.
E05: No cryptographic inventory is in the reviewed file. This is a gap in
     the file, not proof that the supplier lacks an inventory.
E06: An invented report tests one preview configuration. Its relevance
     to the renewed production service requires competent review.
E07: A management log records owners and a conditional next step. It
     supports traceable reasoning, not cryptographic security.
Each fictional record needs a scope, version, date and source in a real
application. Summaries and interpretations should remain distinguishable
from original records.

4. DEPENDENCIES
Supplier availability, interoperability, identity and certificate services,
third-party components, contract terms and specialist review may affect
feasible change. None is resolved by the marketing claim alone.

5. DECISION
The present fictional file cannot substantiate complete service readiness.
Management should compare feasible continuity options with authorised
technical and procurement owners after the relevant evidence is obtained.
This demonstration does not select a renewal, rejection or migration option.

6. ACTIONS
Technical lead: request scope-specific inventory and implementation/test
evidence; arrange competent review of configuration and coverage.
Procurement lead: request supported availability and contract conditions.
Data owner: verify the confidentiality requirement and affected services.
Executive sponsor: own the decision, resource the work and set a review
point before renewal. Agree actual dates and responsibilities in practice.

7. OUTCOMES AND REVIEW
Record whether the evidence requests were answered and whether the
service, configuration and data coverage are now understood.
Reopen the decision if scope, supplier availability, test results,
confidentiality assumptions or business requirements change.

PUBLIC SOURCES CHECKED 16 OCTOBER 2026
ASD: https://www.cyber.gov.au/publication/planning-for-post-quantum-cryptography
ASD vendor questions: https://www.cyber.gov.au/publication/post-quantum-questions-to-ask-your-vendors
NIST ML-KEM: https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/203/final
NIST ML-DSA: https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/fips/204/final

This simplified example discloses no proprietary scoring or playbook.
Specialist review and user testing remain pending.
Research and corrections: aaron@aequitasnexus.org