Vigilens is the AI governance layer for teams that ship continuously. Encode EU AI Act, SOC 2, and NIST AI RMF controls directly into your deployment pipeline -- and stay audit-ready without slowing down.
No credit card. · BYO-LLM -- your data stays yours. · Built in Oslo 🇳🇴
A regulation drops. Lawyers interpret it. Someone writes a policy doc. Teams fill Word templates. Once a year they scramble to prove they did it. Then the model retrains and the cycle breaks.
Your AI team ships 40 times while your compliance team updates one spreadsheet. By the time you're in the audit room, the evidence trail is months out of date and impossible to reconstruct.
Every deployment without a compliance check is a liability you'll pay back later -- under pressure, in front of a regulator, a customer's security team, or a notified body asking for evidence you don't have.
The platform identifies which regulations apply based on your use case — hiring, credit, biometric, customer-facing — and maps the relevant jurisdictions automatically.
The brain of the system. Regulatory obligations mapped to controls, mapped to machine-executable checks. Not a checklist — a running test suite for governance.
Middleware that pulls evidence from where your team actually works — Jira, GitHub, ML platforms, observability tools, vendor contracts — automatically.
Every release triggers compliance checks. Retrained model? Documentation required. Performance regression? Sign-off blocked. Like CI/CD — but for governance.
Answer 6 questions to find out your classification and obligations under the EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689). Based on the official Future of Life Institute compliance flowchart — updated July 2025.
Select the option that best describes your relationship to this AI system. You may qualify as more than one type — run the checker once per role. (Source: Article 3, Recital 83)
These functions are prohibited under Article 5 of the EU AI Act. Select all that apply — if any apply, immediate legal review is required.
These are the Annex III high-risk categories under Article 6(2). Select all that apply — even partial overlap is enough to trigger high-risk status.
These trigger either GPAI obligations (Article 51–55) or transparency obligations (Article 50). Select all that apply.
Certain systems are excluded from scope, and jurisdiction determines whether the Act applies at all. Select all that apply. (Source: Article 2)
We'll email you a personalised compliance summary based on your answers. Company email required — personal email addresses are not accepted.
By submitting you agree to receive your compliance summary and occasional relevant updates from Vigilens. Unsubscribe anytime.
Deadlines are no longer abstract. The EU AI Act's high-risk obligations are live — and most AI teams deploying into HR, credit, and customer decisions have months to get compliant. Here's the practical checklist your legal team won't give you.
Read articleYour code has unit tests. Your infrastructure has Terraform. But your governance still runs on Word documents and annual audits. Rules-as-Code changes that — turning regulations into executable checks that run on every release.
Read articleAI startups are losing enterprise contracts not because of the product — but because they can't produce verifiable proof that their AI is safe, auditable, and under control. The security questionnaire has become the new product demo. Here's how to win it.
Read articleA plain-language guide to understanding the EU AI Act, what Articles 5, 6 and 9 actually require, and a step-by-step checklist to assess your current compliance status.
Read articleCompliance costs of up to €400,000. Launch delays for 60% of EU startups. Here's the data on how regulation is hitting SMEs hardest — and how to automate your way through it.
Read articleProhibited practices were the first to bite. GPAI obligations followed in August 2025. High-risk AI hits 2 August 2026. Full phase-in breakdown and readiness checklist for each enforcement wave.
Read articleFour mandatory components — hazard identification, risk estimation, risk evaluation, risk mitigation — plus the continuous lifecycle obligation that runs from design to post-market monitoring.
Read articleEight sections, a continuous update obligation, and 10-year retention. What Annex IV actually requires — and how to structure your documentation so an auditor can verify it in minutes.
Read articleWho must conduct a FRIA, when it must be done, what it covers, how it differs from a GDPR DPIA, and the Article 27 notification obligation to market surveillance authorities.
Read articleMost AI SaaS companies are simultaneously providers and deployers. The obligations are different and both apply. Here is how to map your product architecture to the right compliance track.
Read articleChapter V applies to GPAI model providers. Chapter III applies to high-risk system deployers. When your GPAI model powers a high-risk application, both chapters apply simultaneously.
Read articlePR naming conventions, branch structure, CODEOWNERS, release tagging, and GitHub Actions checks that generate Article 9, 12, and 14 compliance evidence automatically on every commit.
Read articleAnnex IV page templates, Jira label conventions for tracing obligations to tickets, and how to build the Confluence-Jira-GitHub evidence chain regulators expect.
Read articleMLflow run tags for Article 9 test evidence, model registry compliance gates, Datadog Article 12 log schema, Article 72 monitor naming, and 10-year retention configuration.
Read article