Evidence with citations
Every finding is grounded in a source document and section. Reviewers and auditors can trace any claim back to where it came from - not to a model's recollection.
Governed run replay
Live - no signup
Run AI workflows under your controls.
Watch one get stopped.
A governed vendor-risk run, replayed end to end: source-grounded evidence, deterministic checks, then a human approval gate that rejects the vendor and writes a tamper-evident proof packet.
Read-only replay of an illustrative run - no inputs, no production credentials.
- Source-grounded evidence with citations
- A human approval gate that can stop the run
- A tamper-evident proof packet
- Self-hosted, EU-hosted - under your controls
Vendor risk review
run_8f2c1bvendor-risk/v3
Run receivedstatus
Evidence extractednode
Required document missingnode
Data residency triggernode
Risk score 68/100 - elevatednode
Human approval gateapproval
A real governed run, replayed in full below - ending in a human rejection and an auditable proof packet.
Ready to run - press play
Run received
Document intake & evidence extraction
Deterministic compliance checks
Policy-trigger checks
Risk scoring
Human approval gate
Proof packet recorded
Review complete
Watch a governed run, end to end
Eight events, exactly as the platform recorded them - from intake to a human approval gate that stops the run. Nothing is simulated past what you see here.
status - seq 1
Run received
A vendor onboarding packet was submitted for governed review. The run is registered against flow vendor-risk/v3 and begins under the workspace's controls - every step from here is recorded.
SubjectVendor onboarding packet
Flowvendor-risk/v3
Run idrun_8f2c1b
RegionEU
node - seq 2
Document intake & evidence extraction
Three documents were parsed and source-grounded evidence was extracted - each finding carries a citation back to the document and section it came from.
SOC 2 Type II summary - controls in scope, exceptions noted
Master service agreement - liability & sub-processor terms
Security questionnaire - 84 responses ingested
node - seq 3
Deterministic compliance checks
Rule-based checks ran against the required-document set. Most passed - but one required document is missing, which the gate later depends on.
SOC 2 report present and within validity window
Signed data processing agreement on file
Required document missing
node - seq 4
Policy-trigger checks
Workspace policies were evaluated against the extracted evidence. One policy trigger fired on data residency.
Encryption-at-rest attestation satisfied
Sub-processor data residency outside approved regions
node - seq 5
Risk scoring
The findings were combined into a composite vendor risk score. The score is elevated, so the run is routed to a human reviewer rather than auto-cleared.
68/ 100Elevated
0 - low60 - review threshold100 - high
Above the 60 review threshold -> routed to a human approval gate. No clearance is issued automatically.
approval - seq 6
Human approval gate
Required-documents check
gate: required-documents
A reviewer examined the run and rejected it at the approval gate. The vendor cannot be cleared, and the run stops here - no clearance is issued and no downstream write is performed.
Missing required document - current penetration-test report
Sub-processor data residency outside approved regions
output - seq 7
Proof packet recorded
vendor-risk_run_8f2c1b.packetsha256:9c1a...f70b
Decision
REJECTED
Run stopped before clearance. No vendor record created.REJECTED
Reasons
Missing required document - current penetration-test report
Sub-processor data residency outside approved regions
Evidence (source-grounded citations)
SOC 2 Type II summary soc2.pdf 3.2
Master service agreement msa.pdf 11
Security questionnaire ciq.xlsx Q1-Q84
Written once to a tamper-evident, append-only audit ledger - decision, reviewer, reasons, and evidence.
done - seq 8
Review complete
Finished with a recorded, auditable human decision
The run ended exactly where governance required: a person decided, the decision is logged, and there is a proof packet anyone can audit later. No AI output reached a live system without it.
OutcomeRejected at human gate
Decided bySecurity reviewer
Proof packetrun_8f2c1b
Events recorded8 of 8
What just happened
Three governance moments, in one run.
The replay is not a chatbot demo. It is the control plane doing its job: grounding, gating, and proof - the parts a regulator asks about.
A human gate that can stop the run
Elevated risk routes to a person, not an auto-approve. Here the reviewer rejected - and rejection is final at the gate. The run stops before anything is cleared or written.
A tamper-evident proof packet
The decision, the reviewer, the reasons, and the cited evidence are written once to an append-only audit trail. Months later, you can prove exactly why this vendor was not cleared.
Built for regulated teams - designed to run under your controls
Self-hosted
EU AI Act controls
GDPR controls
Audit trail
Data sovereignty
PrivateFlow is not certified under any compliance framework. Controls are designed to support compliance preparation. Where the EU AI Act applies, high-risk obligations carry penalties up to the EUR 15M / 3% of worldwide annual turnover tier; this run is an illustrative, synthetic example.
See it on your own data
Run this on your own vendors.
We'll stand up a governed pilot on your own data - sandbox first, no production credentials required. You decide what the gates do.