Screen: ApprovalTrail → (a proof) → View record. Also linked directly from the order panel.
What it shows
For a given proof, the record shows: the outcome, when it was recorded (in UTC), the exact wording the customer selected when they decided, their comment, the customer on the order, which file version was involved (by name), that file’s SHA-256 fingerprint, a chain-integrity statement, the proof’s own reference ID, and then the full list of entries in order, each carrying its own hash.
It’s rendered as HTML with a dedicated print stylesheet, plus a “Print or save as PDF” button. There’s no PDF-generation library bundled with ApprovalTrail. That’s a deliberate choice, not a missing feature: browsers print to PDF natively and reliably, and bundling a PDF engine would add a large dependency with its own history of security issues. It would also collide with the WooCommerce PDF-invoice plugins many shops already run.
Chain integrity, in plain terms
Each entry in the record is hashed together with the hash of the entry that came before it. If an entry is altered after the fact, every hash that comes after it stops matching. There’s no way to quietly edit history without the record itself showing it.
The record reports one of two states:
- “Chain intact across N recorded entries.” Nothing has been altered since it was written.
- “Chain broken at entry N. Entries before that point still verify.” Something has changed, and the record tells you exactly where.
If a privacy erasure has been honored on this proof, the record reports the erased entries as redacted rather than as tampering. That distinction matters: honoring a customer’s GDPR request should never look identical to someone quietly editing your evidence. See Privacy and data for how erasure actually works.
The boundary
ApprovalTrail’s own printed record, and every piece of documentation about it, says this, in these words:
This is a record produced by the shop’s own website. It is tamper-evident, not tamper-proof: the database lives on a server the shop controls. It does not capture a handwritten or digital signature, and it makes no claim about its standing in any legal process.
We hold to that line deliberately and consistently. ApprovalTrail’s own test suite fails the build if the rendered record ever contains the words “legally binding,” “e-signature,” “electronic signature,” “court-admissible,” “certified” or “notarised.” Every page of documentation, every support reply, and every piece of marketing copy is held to the same standard.
What the record is actually good for, and what shops actually use it for: ending the “I never approved that” conversation with a date, a file fingerprint, and the exact sentence the customer clicked to say yes.
Frequently asked
Is this a digital signature? No. It’s a timestamped, hash-chained log of an action taken through a token-authorized link. It doesn’t capture a handwritten or cryptographic signature from the customer.
Can I use this in a dispute with a customer? It’s a factual account of what happened on your site and when — many shops find that alone is usually enough to settle an “I never approved that” disagreement. It is not a certified legal instrument, and we don’t represent it as one.
What if someone edits the database directly? The chain-integrity check exists for exactly this: if any entry is altered after it was written, the record will report where the chain breaks.