There is a HUGE technical (though not all that practical) difference between
- Editing a video (which OBS can NOT do)
and
- capturing/playing a video and creating a NEW recording (an edited copy) from there (the original is untouched, and this is definitely something OBS Studio can do, a common use case when compositing actually. I do this every stream/recording as I combine pre-recorded content with new live video. So I'm creating a new copy of the pre-recorded content EVERY time I use OBS Studio. But again, that is NOT editing the original).
Within chain of custody type systems, my first thought is that you should be looking at a write-once, read-many (WORM) type storage solution. but even then, Koala is right, this needs a solution designer who understand the specific jurisdiction and audit/proof requirements for video. But for the sake of argument, let's say you or in a small, remote jurisdiction, with low budget (if anything), and trying to come up with something. And the judicial officer/courts do NOT have sophisticated requirements (a simple, sort of effort will suffice)... then read on.
OBS Studio is a video compositing tool. And I suspect not a good fit for your use case. What are you compositing that even makes OBS Studio an appropriate tool? If some overlay is needed, and proof video not manipulated after-the-fact, I'd be inclined to set up any overlay in the source video camera itself, and stream video directly to a WORM storage system (I've dealt with such for EU tax compliance reporting requirements regarding invoices, be prepared for large dollar values to be involved to get to a certifiable config, not to mention the operational process and training required to maintain such a system). Then your storage system has all the logs/records, audit reports, etc. You can still play a video and make edits, but WORM device will have the original, and would be your source for any 'judicial' officer/audit, etc.
And that is my $0.02 on a direct method, with IANAL caveat and certainly no understanding of your jurisdiction specific requirements
And logging ALL OBS Studio user interactions to a secure location won't be adequate, most likely, as you also need to consider what else may be happening at the Operating System level. And if you set up a system to AUDIT all user activity at OS level, that would include any application, including OBS Studio.
Any ideas I have on taking a video once finished Recording in OBS Studio, and then doing something to 'lock it down', hash recording, etc... all creates opportunity to edit (even if only seconds) before saving ... negating any 'proof', unless the 'bar' is rather low for proof. Another possibility is that your use case involves recording a screen capture (ie web conference or other source where you don't control the camera).. but at that point, you have no proof the video you are capturing is real (not manipulated in the first place). so we are back to specific requirements
So, as you can see, the source content matters. And then there is the storage and audit/source of truth considerations [for which there are many well-known, proven such solutions].
*IF* the proof level is not all that high/sophisticated... would the following suffice?
- highly secured Operating System (special training required... without this step done properly, all the rest is relatively easy to bypass) and physical security to match [or there is no 'proof' drive not taken out of computer (or booted with alternate OS, like bootable USB drive) and drive contents manipulated]
- Record using OBS to drive/partition/folder for which the user logged in ONLY has write access.
- Then separate user credentials required to Read the file (but can't delete/modify).
Anyone trained on info security knows there are ways around the above. But the above is also done in high (to very high) security environments with appropriate counter-measures in place, and it may suffice... depending on level of confidence required, content involved, burden of proof standard that applies, etc.
This stuff gets complicated, and therefore usually expensive, quick and the details are all important. There is a HUGE gulf between most likely/probably authentic, and 'I can prove this is original, unedited video'. Closing that gulf typical takes lots of money, effort, and well-trained people, physically secure systems, etc. Unless your judicial officer has low expectations/requirements, any well-trained knowledgeable IT security person will be able to poke quick holes in all but the most sophisticated (and expensive) solutions.