Verifiable Provenance and Watermarking for Generative AI: An Evidentiary Framework for International Operational Law and Domestic Courts

Governments are increasingly mandating that LLM-generated content carry watermarks. The EU AI Act calls for markings that are "sufficiently reliable and robust." California's SB 942 requires disclosure that is "permanent or extraordinarily difficult to remove." Both mandates rest on an untested assumption: that watermark detection yields evidence reliable enough for courts. This paper tests that assumption directly. We evaluate three representative LLM watermarking methods -- KGW, Unigram, and the MarkLLM implementation of SynthID-Text -- against the Daubert admissibility criteria and the NIST SP 800-86 digital forensic process. To structure this evaluation, we propose a Forensic Readiness Score (FRS) framework with 12 criteria, three mandatory gates, and a 60-point scoring system. We focus on meaning-preserving paraphrase as the attack vector, since it is both legally realistic and difficult to dismiss as evidence tampering. The results raise serious evidentiary concerns. Out of 846 valid paraphrase runs across 15 diverse prompts per method, every single initially-detected KGW and Unigram text lost its watermark after paraphrasing -- 100% conditional removal. SynthID fared only slightly better at 98.3%. Even before any attack, false-negative rates were already high: 70% for KGW, 83% for Unigram, 80% for SynthID. The SynthID configuration also flagged 5.4% of paraphrased human-written controls as AI-generated and showed an 18.6% paradox rate, with 80% of its own pristine watermarked output landing in the uncertainty deadband. None of the three methods satisfy more than two of five Daubert factors. We also find that the FRS point-based scoring system, despite working as designed, cannot fully capture forensic uselessness -- a limitation worth noting for future framework design. These configurations, as tested, do not meet the evidentiary bar that courts require.

Generative AI systems increasingly produce content whose provenance is difficult to verify, motivating watermarking techniques for identifying model-generated outputs. Existing cryptographic watermarking methods provide strong undetectability guarantees: without a detection key, watermarked outputs are computationally indistinguishable from unwatermarked ones. However, these approaches do not address the crucial deployment challenge of how to safely delegate detection capabilities. With an unrestricted detection key, a malicious detector may use the detection key beyond its intended scope, enabling watermark sanitization, scope abuse, and user profiling. To mitigate this safety concern, we introduce, to the best of our knowledge, the first \emph{attribute-based watermarking} for generative AI models, providing fine-grained, policy-controlled watermark detection. In our approach, each generated output is associated with attributes, and each detection key is \emph{constrained by a policy} on potential attributes. A detection key can only be used to detect watermarked outputs whose attributes satisfy the corresponding policy, while watermarked outputs that fall outside the policy remain computationally indistinguishable from unwatermarked ones. We construct such an attribute-based watermarking scheme and formalize its security properties, including consistency, adaptive robustness to bounded corruptions, undetectability, and soundness, along with a security proof under standard cryptographic assumptions. Our construction integrates constrained pseudorandom functions, pseudorandom error-correcting codes, and randomness recovery procedures with generative AI models. Finally, we implement a prototype and an empirical evaluation, demonstrating that attribute-based watermarking is both effective and practical.

The widespread deployment of generative artificial intelligence (AI) models has raised serious concerns about the proliferation of AI-generated content. This has led to a surge of interest in, and demand for, reliable tracking and detection mechanisms for content that is AI-generated, such as watermarking, metadata tagging, content tagging, and more. The problem has captured the attention of policymakers as well as the popular media, and a spate of recent bills in the US have sought to regulate the spread of AI content, and enforce or promote methods to track and label it. This work performs a critical analysis of the policy discourse surrounding generative AI content transparency in the US and EU. Through a broad document selection methodology, we first collect a broad corpus of documents containing legislative language and policy-relevant discourse on the topic. We then analyze these through inductive coding, and leverage our coding to systematize these documents, identifying key patterns, gaps, and open questions. We identify critical points of disconnect between policy and technological capabilities and practice, and we highlight and discuss potential ambiguities and pitfalls raised by the trends in our corpus.