Which entries describe something inside the file
Seven entries describe something a machine could read: four write a signed manifest into the container, and three embed a signal into the picture or the sound. The other nine say nothing about that layer. As of 2026-09-12.
| Point | Where it sits | What the record holds |
|---|---|---|
| A signed manifest in the container | Article 50(2), provider | Four entries, all naming the same specification |
| A signal embedded in the content | Article 50(2), provider | Three entries, two of them for audio |
| Nothing on that layer | Recorded as not documented | Nine entries, mostly read from pricing pages |
Inclusion rule. An entry counts in a row only where the vendor's own pages describe that kind of mark. Silence is counted in the third row rather than assigned to either mechanism. Order. Provider-side mechanisms first, then the entries that describe neither.
1A manifest and an embedded signal are not two versions of one thing
One rides in the container beside the content and can be signed, so it carries structure and is dropped by any rebuild. The other alters the content slightly and survives that rebuild, carrying close to a single bit.
Because they fail under opposite handling, an entry describing both is making a materially stronger statement than an entry describing either. Two entries in this record describe both, applied to the same output.
2Four entries converging on one specification, and nothing else converging
Nothing else in this record looks like an industry agreeing on anything. Four vendors write manifests in the same published format, which means a reader who learns to open one file has learned to open all four.
It does not mean their coverage matches. One says all assets, one names a version, one names a set of features, and one attaches the claim to outputs generally. Format and coverage are separate rows for that reason.
3Nine silences, and only one of them earned a page
Most of the nine are the same silence: a pricing page had no reason to mention a container. Recording that nine times would be recording one fact nine times, so the column page counts them and the statements section does not repeat them.
The exception is an entry whose silence appears twice, once in an API reference and once in the terms attached to published model weights. That second silence is a different kind, and it has a page of its own.
- OpenAI Sora (openai.com)C2PA metadata on all assets, listed as providing verifiable origin through an industry standardfirst item under provenance safety tooling
- Adobe Firefly (adobe.com)Outputs include Content Credentials that indicate AI was used in the creation processa generative image and video tool
- Amazon Nova ReelVersion 1.1 adds Content Credentials based on the C2PA specification, carrying the model and the platform usedthe second provenance layer
- Microsoft Designer (microsoft.com)Content credentials, provenance based on the C2PA standard, are applied to all images created with the editing featuresan image generation and editing tool
4Sources
Article wording from AI Act Explorer, Article 50; vendor statements from the pages listed on each generator entry. Both read 2026-09-12. Related: Numbers without names, Where it is written, Nothing unless asked.