> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.aigl.blog/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# AI Vendor Security and Safety Assessment Guide
- URL: https://www.aigl.blog/ai-vendor-security-and-safety-assessment-guide/
- Published: 2025-04-07T18:31:31.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-12T20:05:26.000Z
- Description: A practical tool to support procurement teams, legal advisors, CISOs, and AI governance leads in evaluating vendors supplying AI-based systems or services.
- Author: Jakub Szarmach
- Tags: Guide, #aigl-library, Supply Chain & Third-Party Risk, AI Security, Responsible AI, Risk Management, Privacy & Data Protection

[AI-Vendor-Security-and-Safety-Assessment-Guide 1.01AI-Vendor-Security-and-Safety-Assessment-Guide 1.01.pdf2 MBdownload-circle](https://www.aigl.blog/content/files/2025/04/AI-Vendor-Security-and-Safety-Assessment-Guide-1.01.pdf "Download")

## **What It Offers ?**

This guide provides a **ready-to-use question set** to help assess AI vendors across a wide range of dimensions—**security, privacy, ethics, robustness, data handling, explainability**, and more. It’s designed to plug directly into your existing **Third-Party Risk Management (TPRM)** workflows and can be especially valuable **before signing contracts** or onboarding new tools involving machine learning or generative AI.

Structured like a due diligence playbook, it emphasizes **real-world applicability** and operational control. The document balances policy goals with actionable details—something many AI “principle documents” tend to miss.

## **What Works Well**

**1\. Holistic, Modular Design**

From business impact to security architecture, from explainability to nth-party risk, the guide reflects an understanding that **AI risk is multidimensional**. It’s clear, logically sequenced, and easily adaptable to different organizational contexts.

**2\. Concrete, Decision-Oriented Questions**

This isn’t a vague checklist. Many questions are phrased to **elicit specific operational practices**—like whether the vendor supports BYOK (Bring Your Own Key), enables client-configurable retention periods, or provides model scorecards. That focus helps buyers make informed, traceable choices.

**3\. Risk Prioritization Advice**

The introduction includes a call to **prioritize based on risk level**, reminding readers that not every system deserves the same scrutiny. That pragmatic framing keeps the process lean without sacrificing thoroughness.

**4\. Integration-Ready with Existing Frameworks**

The guide aligns neatly with industry frameworks like **ISO/IEC 42001**, **NIST AI RMF**, **EU AI Act**, and even more traditional compliance approaches like **SOC 2** or **ISO 27001**—allowing smooth integration into current TPRM systems.

## **🚩 Gaps and Caveats**

- **No built-in risk rating or scoring rubric**: While the guide offers excellent questions, it stops short of providing a structured scoring system. This might require extra work to align it with procurement or audit dashboards.
- **Vendor burden vs. buyer capacity**: Smaller AI vendors may struggle to answer every question at the depth expected here, and not every procurement team will have the internal bandwidth to interpret complex responses without expert support.
- **Limited examples or model answers**: Some illustrative answers or common red flags would be helpful, especially for readers less familiar with AI-specific risks.

## **💡 Why it matters?**

As AI systems become embedded into enterprise operations—from HR tools to customer support and content moderation—**security and safety due diligence cannot stop at generic IT questions**. This guide fills that gap, giving procurement teams a concrete foundation to interrogate **model design, data usage, bias mitigation, adversarial robustness**, and more. It’s especially relevant for regulated sectors, critical infrastructure, and organizations bound by data residency or AI transparency rules.

It also helps bridge the policy-to-practice gap in AI governance, where high-level principles often lack real procurement hooks. Here, the link between *responsible AI* and *vendor contracts* is made explicit.

## **Best For:**

- **Procurement teams** evaluating generative AI, LLMs, or automated decision tools
- **AI governance officers** drafting internal vendor evaluation criteria
- **Legal, risk, or security teams** negotiating AI contracts or reviewing SLAs
- **Auditors and internal controls leads** needing structured AI vendor assessment frameworks

## **Author Note:**

**Dennis Ah King** is a respected voice in AI risk and governance, with a background in strategic security risk management. His work reflects a hands-on, operational perspective—translating policy language into procurement and implementation controls. More on his work: [Dennis Ah King on LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/in/dennisahking/?ref=aigl.blog)

## **09.04.2025 - Update**

  
Dennis Ah King has just released an updated version of his *AI Vendor Security & Safety Assessment Guide*.

The latest version now includes author attribution and a reference to CC.40\. It’s available at the same link for anyone using or sharing the guide:

He also plans to address some of the “gaps and caveats” highlighted in recent feedback — stay tuned for those improvements.

Looking forward to seeing what others will be sharing next!