<format type="yaml">{audit_id: string, document_source: string, audit_date: date, system_name: string, system_version: string, architectural_components: list[{component_id: string, component_name: string, description: string, type: string, owner_team: string optional, estimated_loc: number optional, dependencies: list[{target_component_id: string, dependency_type: string, protocol: string optional}], compliance_status: {is_compliant: boolean, standards_applied: list[string], non_compliance_issues: list[string] optional}}], security_considerations: {encryption_in_transit: boolean, data_at_rest_encryption: boolean, access_control_mechanisms: list[string], vulnerability_assessment_status: string optional, estimated_cost_usd_annual: number optional}, traceability_matrix: list[{requirement_id: string, implemented_by_components: list[string], test_coverage_status: string optional}] optional, auditor_notes: string optional}</format> <data>**CONFIDENTIAL: System Architecture Audit Findings**

**Reference ID:** SYSARCH-AUDIT-2024-833
**Subject:** Aggregate Virtual Partnerships System (Version 1.6.3)
**Date of Review:** 2023-10-01

This memorandum summarizes the findings from the architectural compliance audit conducted on the Aggregate Virtual Partnerships System, based on the review of document 'Aggregate_Virtual_Partnerships_System_Architecture_v1.6.3.docx'. The session was quite productive, though we had to reschedule the morning session due to a fire drill. The system comprises 2 core architectural components. 

From a compliance perspective, the assessment is mixed. Positive adherence to standards like Internal_Security_V3 was noted in components such as MajorAffectBatchProcessor. 

Security posture analysis reveals that access control is managed via JWT, API_Keys, SAML. Encryption for data in transit is currently active. The status of data-at-rest encryption is noted as implemented. The last vulnerability assessment is marked as 'Scheduled_Q4'. The projected annual operational overhead for these security measures is approximately $41514.66 USD. 

Inter-component dependency mapping shows a complex web of interactions. For instance, the MajorAffectBatchProcessor (AVP-MSG-001) depends_on the component identified as AVP-DB-002. 

**Auditor's Closing Remarks:** Leader from spring small science reason. Southern see anyone administration far son site. Deep them include them cup.</data>
audit_id: SYSARCH-AUDIT-2024-833
document_source: Aggregate_Virtual_Partnerships_System_Architecture_v1.6.3.docx
audit_date: '2023-10-01'
system_name: Aggregate Virtual Partnerships System
system_version: 1.6.3
architectural_components:
- component_id: AVP-MSG-001
  component_name: MajorAffectBatchProcessor
  description: Range political fish discussion player practice left blue picture player
    section whole yard choose herself.
  type: Batch Processor
  dependencies:
  - target_component_id: AVP-DB-002
    dependency_type: depends_on
  compliance_status:
    is_compliant: true
    standards_applied:
    - Internal_Security_V3
  owner_team: Extend_Infra
  estimated_loc: 73462
- component_id: AVP-DB-002
  component_name: TvTechnologyCache
  description: Us order million probably structure trial so fear.
  type: Cache
  dependencies: []
  compliance_status:
    is_compliant: true
    standards_applied:
    - Internal_Security_V3
    - PCI_DSS_4.0
    - GDPR
  owner_team: Optimize_Infra
  estimated_loc: 9409
security_considerations:
  encryption_in_transit: true
  data_at_rest_encryption: true
  access_control_mechanisms:
  - JWT
  - API_Keys
  - SAML
  vulnerability_assessment_status: Scheduled_Q4
  estimated_cost_usd_annual: 41514.66
auditor_notes: Leader from spring small science reason. Southern see anyone administration
  far son site. Deep them include them cup.
