Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
32 lines (27 loc) · 2.01 KB

File metadata and controls

32 lines (27 loc) · 2.01 KB

Responsible technology audit register

Reviewed: 2026-07-10
Scope: GTFS Scorecard website, pipeline, public API, GitHub Action, alerts, and optional serverless infrastructure. The product performs deterministic validation and scoring; it does not use model inference or make eligibility decisions.

Review Artifact Result Recheck
Consequence scan audits/consequence-scan.md Proceed with named safeguards Methodology or ranking change
Bias and disparate-impact review audits/bias-review.md Proceed; comparisons remain bounded and optional RT stays neutral Rubric/data-source change
DPIA-lite audits/dpia-lite.md Low privacy risk; minimize subscriptions and logs New personal-data field or processor
Threat model audits/threat-model.md Key abuse paths mitigated and CI-gated New write API, auth, or infrastructure

Declarations

  • No sensitive rider data, trip histories, precise user locations, or protected-class attributes are collected.
  • Public agency data is scored, not people. Grades are not service-quality, compliance, procurement, or staff-performance certifications.
  • Missing realtime is neutral. Absolute rankings and individual percentiles are not published. Aggregate scores and named changes require the current rubric, measured schedule categories, and an unambiguous canonical feed identity.
  • Feed corrections and agency claims require evidence and human review. Opening a request never verifies control or changes the registry automatically.
  • Alert subscriptions use double opt-in, store only the minimum delivery information, and support removal.
  • The accessibility target is WCAG 2.2 AAA. Automated evidence is merge-blocking; human assistive-technology evidence remains a maintained review artifact, not something automation can fabricate.

These are engineering assessments, not legal opinions or certifications.