The AI Governance Gap in Regulated Industries
Most regulated companies don't have an AI governance gap, they have a void. Here's what closing it actually requires.
Practical analysis for security and compliance leaders navigating AI adoption. No vendor content, just what we're seeing on engagements and in the threat landscape.
Most regulated companies don't have an AI governance gap, they have a void. Here's what closing it actually requires.
AI is compressing the window between vulnerability disclosure and active exploitation. Monthly patch cycles weren't built for this.
The AI tools your organization didn't approve are already in use. The question is how large it is and what it's touching.
The first international standard for AI management systems. Customer questionnaires are already asking about it.
The best available taxonomy for AI system risks, but most teams are reading it wrong. A practitioner's view for regulated environments.
Your engineers are already using Cursor, Claude Code, and Copilot. Here's what a real governance program looks like.
The most widely exploited vulnerability in deployed AI systems, and most organizations don't have detection built for it.
The FDA and EMA are watching AI in regulated manufacturing and clinical operations. What organizations need to be documenting now.
Most governance fails not because the policy is wrong, but because the process is so slow developers route around it.
Most assessments start with interviews. Ours start with scripts. Why automation-first discovery produces better findings faster.
We're happy to have a direct conversation, no pitch, no process.