PolicyWatcherPublic evidence laboratory

Public Evidence Packet

Plaid - End User Services Agreement

End User Services Agreement

725582fb-d698-4d30-aeb3-810d221ad7c9
Screening date
06 Jul 2026, 22:08 UTC
Jurisdiction
EU
Risk screening
High · 7/10
Score trace
Baseline; no earlier public change

This packet records PolicyWatcher evidence and AI-assisted screening for one public change. It is not legal advice, a compliance verdict, a certification, or proof that the external source remains unchanged.

  1. 01Source evidence
  2. 02Explainability
  3. 03Governance Relevance
  4. 04Report Output
01

Dataset QA · sanitized public view

Source evidence

Publication gate
Published
Retrieval state
Recorded retrieval available
Latest retrieval
04 Nov 2026, 18:39 UTC
Sanitized channel
direct
Data status
Available
Public snapshot evidence
Available

Public snapshot fingerprints

Previous snapshot

Not available as public evidence for this change.

Current · version 1e109c8a4674ca7b407c8e08764e28825d033b7c96b0ecc4575bb674078c4264dCaptured 06 Jul 2026, 22:08 UTC

Source confidence describes recorded retrieval and publication state. It does not rate the provider policy or certify source authenticity.

02

Source-anchored screening trace

Explainability

Plaid accesses your financial account data with explicit consent, sharing it with third-party apps you use, and you can withdraw consent anytime.

  1. Reason 1+2 score contribution

    Extensive financial data collection.

    Related KPI
    No related KPI recorded
    Source side
    Not recorded
    Source passage not recorded

    This historical reason has no recorded source passage.

  2. Reason 2+3 score contribution

    Broad data sharing with third-party apps.

    Related KPI
    No related KPI recorded
    Source side
    Not recorded
    Source passage not recorded

    This historical reason has no recorded source passage.

  3. Reason 3+2 score contribution

    Limited liability for third-party actions.

    Related KPI
    No related KPI recorded
    Source side
    Not recorded
    Source passage not recorded

    This historical reason has no recorded source passage.

Score reasons and deltaScore values are stored AI-assisted screening outputs. Verified anchors confirm only that the quoted passage occurs in the named snapshot; they do not prove the interpretation.

03

Advisory review map

Governance Relevance

EU AI Act

Official Journal text, 2024

Not assessed

Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, automated decisions, data use and human oversight review?

No assessed KPI value is available for this advisory mapping.

Framework source

ISO/IEC 42001

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 overview

Not assessed

Which recorded policy statements may inform an AI management-system review of transparency, risk oversight and independent assurance?

No assessed KPI value is available for this advisory mapping.

Framework source

NIST AI RMF

AI RMF 1.0; NIST revision in progress, checked 2026-07-29

Not assessed

Which recorded policy statements may support Govern, Map, Measure or Manage review questions?

No assessed KPI value is available for this advisory mapping.

Framework source

OECD AI Principles

OECD AI Principles, updated 2024

Not assessed

Which recorded policy statements may be relevant to transparency, fairness, accountability and user agency review?

No assessed KPI value is available for this advisory mapping.

Framework source

Mappings identify review relevance between recorded PolicyWatcher KPI fields and framework topics. They are not legal interpretations, conformity assessments, certifications or compliance verdicts.

04

Exact change-bound files

Report Output

Both files are generated from this exact change ID.

Download exact-change PDF Download exact-change JSON
Packet content digest · SHA-25667ce7587fdf87bd86dcf59dc81a0b71233d6abd793ee95e3576f718acae452c8

Questions before reuse

  1. Does the original End User Services Agreement source still match the recorded public snapshot version 1?
  2. Do the cited source passages support each displayed reason, KPI value and regional note?
  3. Which advisory framework topics require specialist legal, risk or governance review for this use case?
  4. Has a later public change superseded this packet before it is reused in a decision or publication?