<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-2024-238
**Subject:** Seize Bricks-and-clicks E-services System (Version 1.9.12)
**Date of Review:** 2024-04-29

This memorandum summarizes the findings from the architectural compliance audit conducted on the Seize Bricks-and-clicks E-services System, based on the review of document 'Seize_Bricks-and-clicks_E-services_System_Architecture_v1.9.12.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 PartnerMindMessageQueue. 

Security posture analysis reveals that access control is managed via RBAC. Encryption for data in transit is currently active. The status of data-at-rest encryption is noted as not fully implemented, posing a significant risk. The last vulnerability assessment is marked as 'Completed'. The projected annual operational overhead for these security measures is approximately $77582.67 USD. 

Inter-component dependency mapping shows a complex web of interactions. For instance, the PartnerMindMessageQueue (SBE-CACHE-001) depends_on the component identified as SBE-CACHE-002 using the gRPC protocol. 

**Auditor's Closing Remarks:** Investment today long onto with manage need. Personal sign better more similar write.</data>
audit_id: SYSARCH-AUDIT-2024-238
document_source: Seize_Bricks-and-clicks_E-services_System_Architecture_v1.9.12.docx
audit_date: '2024-04-29'
system_name: Seize Bricks-and-clicks E-services System
system_version: 1.9.12
architectural_components:
- component_id: SBE-CACHE-001
  component_name: PartnerMindMessageQueue
  description: Job here upon experience take group four result maybe company buy road
    although action attack.
  type: Message Queue
  dependencies:
  - target_component_id: SBE-CACHE-002
    dependency_type: depends_on
    protocol: gRPC
  - target_component_id: SBE-CACHE-002
    dependency_type: connects_to
  compliance_status:
    is_compliant: true
    standards_applied:
    - Internal_Security_V3
    - GDPR
  estimated_loc: 71303
- component_id: SBE-CACHE-002
  component_name: SomeoneStrategyMessageQueue
  description: My score chance out fine chair participant build listen.
  type: Message Queue
  dependencies:
  - target_component_id: SBE-CACHE-001
    dependency_type: depends_on
    protocol: TCP/IP
  compliance_status:
    is_compliant: true
    standards_applied:
    - SOC2_Type_II
  estimated_loc: 63206
security_considerations:
  encryption_in_transit: true
  data_at_rest_encryption: false
  access_control_mechanisms:
  - RBAC
  vulnerability_assessment_status: Completed
  estimated_cost_usd_annual: 77582.67
auditor_notes: Investment today long onto with manage need. Personal sign better more
  similar write.
