Skip to main content
reopt Handbook
reopt Handbook
AI Security and Compliance Operations

Strategy and Governance

Risk GovernanceData ProtectionSecure Architecture

Security Controls

Prompt Injection DefenseAccess Control and SecretsAudit Readiness

Operations and Leadership

Incident ResponseBoard Reporting

Appendix

GlossaryVerificationUpdates
Handbook›AI Security and Compliance›Audit Readiness
한국어KOEnglishEN

Audit Readiness

Build evidence pipelines for AI controls before formal audits begin.

Written and reviewed by Eric Han · Co-founder & CTO, reopt

Key takeaways

  • Audit readiness comes from evidence produced by normal operations, not a one-time scramble during audit season.
  • Map each control to concrete evidence: system register, data classification, role matrix and approval logs, deployment records, monitoring dashboards, and vendor DPAs.
  • Assign an owner to every control and evidence source, and store proof in a durable, access-controlled location.
  • Link audit requests to existing control IDs and review gaps after every audit, incident, or major product change.
  • Good evidence answers who did what, when, why, under which policy, and with what result.

Article 50: separate roles and evidence

ProvisionMain obligationEvidence example
50(1)Disclose interaction with AI, subject to exceptions such as obvious interactionFirst-contact UI/audio and applicability decision
50(2)Provider machine-readable marking and detectability of synthetic contentOutput markings and transformation checks
50(3)Inform people exposed to emotion recognition or biometric categorizationNotice, context, and delivery time
50(4)Deployer disclosure for deepfakes and AI-generated public-interest textHuman-readable labels and editorial review/responsibility records

First establish the role and applicable exceptions. Machine-readable markings alone do not discharge a deployer's human-facing disclosure obligation. The public-interest text exception requires substantive human review/editorial control and editorial responsibility. The December 2, 2026 grace period covers only Article 50(2) for systems placed on the market before August 2, not all transparency notices.

AI Omnibus entry into force · Article 50 FAQ

Audit readiness is easier when evidence is produced by normal operations. A control that cannot be proven later will not satisfy auditors or leadership.

Evidence Map

ControlEvidence examples
System inventoryAI system register, owner list, model/vendor list
Data protectionData classification, retention policy, access review
Access controlRole matrix, approval logs, token rotation record
Change managementPull requests, deployment records, review approvals
MonitoringLogs, alerts, incidents, dashboard snapshots
Vendor governanceDPA, subprocessor list, security review

Operating Cadence

  • Collect evidence continuously, not only during audit season.
  • Assign an owner to every control and evidence source.
  • Store evidence in a durable, access-controlled location.
  • Link audit requests to existing control IDs.
  • Review gaps after every audit, incident, or major product change.

Quality Check

Good evidence answers who did what, when, why, under which policy, and with what result.

Related docs

Updates

Change log for the AI Security and Compliance Operations handbook.

Verification

A checklist for validating AI security and compliance operations.

Current verification scope

Codex Command Master · Codex CLI: Current coverage, checks, and limits of the official-source comparison and automated validation.

Access Control and Secrets

Govern human, service, and agent permissions with least privilege and rotation.

Incident Response

Prepare AI-specific incident detection, containment, recovery, and communication.

On this page

Article 50: separate roles and evidenceEvidence MapOperating CadenceQuality Check