Blog

Analysis on enterprise AI governance, inline policy enforcement, agentic AI security, and regulatory compliance.

Google SAIF: Turn the Secure AI Framework Into Control Ownership

Google SAIF maps AI security risks and controls across four component areas: data, infrastructure, model, and application. A useful implementation turns that map into a versioned ownership record for each relevant risk, with an enforcement point, acceptance test, evidence location, and review trigger. This guide explains the framework, the artifact security teams should build, and the limited request-boundary slice that DeepInspect can support.

Compliance & Regulationai-securityai-governanceai-compliancearchitecturepolicy-enforcementaudit
Read post →

GitHub Copilot GDPR: Map Controller, Processor, and Model Routes

A GitHub Copilot GDPR review should assign controller and processor roles by processing activity, identify model and subprocessor routes, connect each purpose to its data categories and retention terms, and test what actually leaves developer tools. GitHub may act as processor for most organization-account activity and as controller for specified activities, so one label for the whole service is unreliable.

Compliance & Regulationgithub-copilotgdprdata-protectionvendor-riskai-governanceaudit-evidence
Read post →

Federal AI Preemption: What Executive Order 14365 Actually Does

Executive Order 14365 creates a federal strategy for challenging selected state AI laws, evaluating state measures, attaching conditions to some funding, and developing federal reporting and legislative proposals. It does not erase state law by itself. Compliance teams need a versioned obligation register that separates enacted duties from litigation, agency proceedings, funding actions, and proposed legislation.

Compliance & Regulationai-governanceai-regulationstate-ai-lawsfederal-policycomplianceaudit-evidence
Read post →

AI Tabletop Exercise: Turn the CISA Scenario Into a Control Test

A useful AI tabletop exercise makes response teams prove detection, containment, evidence capture, external sharing, continuity, and restart decisions across one escalating scenario. This guide turns the CISA JCDC exercise into an enterprise test with observable results while keeping model traffic controls separate from endpoint, supply-chain, and crisis-management duties.

Compliance & Regulationai-governanceincident-responsecybersecuritycisaai-agentsaudit-evidence
Read post →

Solo.io Pricing: Open-Source Gateways and Enterprise Scope

Solo.io pricing is quote-led for its commercial products, while the current product family also contains open-source gateway projects. Kgateway is a CNCF Sandbox project under Apache 2.0 with optional enterprise extensions. Agentgateway is a Linux Foundation project for LLM, MCP, and agent traffic. A sound estimate separates software licenses, enterprise support, deployment labor, infrastructure, observability, and the distinct jobs of each gateway.

Comparisons & Alternativesai-securityllm-securityagentic-aiarchitecturecloud-security
Read post →

Requesty Pricing: Free Tier, 5% Markup, and Enterprise Scope

Requesty pricing has a published Free tier, a pay-as-you-go tier priced at model cost plus 5%, and an Enterprise route with custom support and service commitments. The useful budget separates provider model consumption from Requesty’s markup, then accounts for caching, routing, failover, governance, access controls, data residency, and evidence retention without treating an illustrative dashboard or performance claim as a contractual entitlement.

Comparisons & Alternativesai-securityllmai-governancepolicy-enforcementarchitecture
Read post →

LayerX Pricing After the Akamai Acquisition

LayerX pricing now belongs inside an Akamai procurement conversation. LayerX announced its agreement to join Akamai, the LayerX homepage redirects to Akamai Workforce Protector, and Akamai presents that product as formerly LayerX. Buyers should scope browser-native AI usage control and SaaS and web protection, then identity context and desktop coverage, plus deployment, support, and policy evidence under the current product and contracting identity.

Comparisons & Alternativesai-securityshadow-aidata-loss-preventionidentity-and-authorizationarchitecture
Read post →

Lasso Security Pricing: Quote Scope and Open-Source Boundaries

Lasso Security pricing is sales-led for the commercial AI Security Platform. Its public pages describe discovery, assessment, red teaming, runtime enforcement, and detection, but they do not publish a complete dollar rate card. The open-source MCP Gateway is a separate product boundary, so a useful quote request must identify the platform modules, protected applications, deployment points, support terms, and evidence requirements.

Comparisons & Alternativesai-securityllm-securityagentic-aipolicy-enforcementarchitecture
Read post →

India AI Governance Guidelines Need Control Owners, Tests, and Evidence

India's AI governance work points toward coordinated oversight across ministries rather than one isolated technical rulebook. Enterprises can prepare by mapping each AI use case to a named owner, a measurable control, an evidence record, and a review trigger. The useful output is an operating file that connects policy to the system's actual data flows and decisions.

Compliance & Regulationai-governanceai-complianceregulationauditpolicy-enforcementarchitecture
Read post →

Is Grok HIPAA Compliant? The BAA and Zero Data Retention Gate

SpaceXSI publishes a BAA request path for customers using its APIs, and its Enterprise Terms require both an executed BAA and the Zero Data Retention-enabled API before protected health information is submitted. That public evidence establishes conditional API eligibility, not blanket HIPAA compliance for every Grok product. Healthcare teams must verify the executed agreement, order form, API route, ZDR status, subprocessors, customer controls, and exact workflow before sending PHI.

Industry Verticalshipaaai-compliancegrokai-securitypolicy-enforcementaudit
Read post →

Does Perplexity Train on Your Data? Consumer, Enterprise, and API Rules

Perplexity applies different model-training rules to consumer accounts, Enterprise products, and its API. Free, Pro, and Max accounts have AI data retention enabled by default but can opt out for future data. Enterprise customer content and API customer content are excluded from model training under current terms. Training, service processing, retention, feedback, and anonymized usage data remain separate review questions.

Problem-Awareai-securityai-governanceperplexitydata-loss-preventionpolicy-enforcement
Read post →

Does Gemini Train on Your Data? Consumer, Workspace, and API Rules

Google applies different data-use rules to consumer Gemini Apps, managed Google Workspace accounts, and the Gemini API. Consumer chats may improve Google AI when Keep Activity is on. Workspace content is not used for generative AI model training outside the domain without permission. Unpaid Gemini API content may be used to improve products, while paid API prompts and responses are excluded from product improvement. This guide maps the product boundaries an enterprise must record before approving Gemini use.

Problem-Awareai-securityai-governancegeminidata-loss-preventionpolicy-enforcement
Read post →