This report outlines a practical tool developed by the Quad Verification Technologies Workstream to help assess how easily different pieces of verification equipment can be authenticated by inspectors and certified for safe, secure use by a host facility.
It explains why both perspectives matter for building confidence in nuclear‑disarmament verification, and shows how factors such as software complexity, safety risks, data‑handling methods, and deployment locations can shape the challenges involved.
Through worked examples—including a neutron counter and a digital camera—the report demonstrates how the tool highlights where equipment may face significant safety or security barriers, and where it can be more effectively deployed.
The approach is intended to support future treaty planning by helping states understand the trade‑offs involved in equipment selection, encouraging realistic, system‑wide verification strategies that protect sensitive information while enabling trustworthy inspection activities.