Map the system
Evaluate AI systems, agents, vendors and data flows in context.
Independent AI security & governance
Understand your AI risk. Know what to fix.
Independent assessments of AI systems, agents, vendors and sensitive-data flows. Get evidence-backed findings and clear remediation priorities.
From evidence to action
Review the evidence
Assess evidence against relevant frameworks and requirements.
Prioritize fixes
Get clear findings and practical remediation priorities.
01 / WHAT BROUGHT YOU HERE?
Start with the problem you are trying to solve.
You do not need to know which assessment package you need. Start with the review trigger, system, or risk that brought you here.
01
A customer is asking about our AI
Turn architecture, data flows, safeguards, vendor dependencies, and limitations into evidence a reviewer can follow.
Explore customer diligence →02We put sensitive data into AI
Map where regulated or confidential information reaches AI services and determine what controls and evidence actually cover it.
Explore data-risk review →03We are deploying AI agents
Assess agent identity, authority, prompt-injection exposure, tools, data access, external actions, and containment.
Explore agent security →04We need to assess an AI vendor
Review the provider, data boundary, access model, evidence, contractual assumptions, and security dependencies around the use case.
Choose your industry →05We do not know how teams are using AI
Start with practical AI data-safety guidance, then inventory approved and unmanaged use before deciding whether formal assessment is needed.
Start with the free guide →02 / THE REVIEW TRIGGER
Someone important asking hard questions about your AI?
A SOC 2 report, policy set, or completed questionnaire may not answer the AI-specific questions now appearing in customer diligence, procurement, compliance, and security review.
AI systems
You may not have one defensible inventory of every AI product, model, provider, integration, and workflow.
Sensitive-data flows
Reviewers need to understand what information reaches which AI providers—and under what controls.
Security evidence
Existing artifacts may not explain the AI-specific controls, decisions, and residual risks the reviewer is asking about.
03 / THE DELIVERABLE
Reviewer-ready evidence
Give the reviewer something they can actually review.
The assessment turns a dispersed set of systems, data flows, controls, and evidence into a coherent, signed record. Deliverables are tailored to engagement scope—not represented as universal industry requirements.
AYLIEA / SAMPLE-001ILLUSTRATIVE CONTENTS
AI security evidence package
01Executive summary✓
02AI system inventory✓
03Data-flow documentation✓
04Security findings✓
05Risk prioritization✓
06Industry-relevant mapping✓
07NIST AI RMF mapping✓
08Remediation recommendations✓
09Evidence references✓
10Assessor sign-off✓
ASSESSOR NOTE
Findings, limitations, and evidence references are documented within the agreed scope.
Assessment basis
The report shows how each conclusion was formed.
Evidence is labeled by source and review method so a receiving reviewer can distinguish direct observation from supplied documents, stakeholder representations, and work that was not tested.
Observed
Directly inspected artifacts, settings, demonstrations, or workflows.
Supplied
Documentation provided by the client or another in-scope source.
Represented
A stakeholder statement that was not independently established.
Not tested
A procedure or condition the written scope did not independently validate.
04 / Engagement
A clear path from scope to signed assessment.
The engagement follows a documented path from scope and evidence review through findings, human review, and final delivery.
- 1
Scope
20-minute call to determine systems, entities, data flows, evidence, and review requirements.
- 2
Assess
Ayliea reviews the scoped environment and the evidence provided.
- 3
Document
Findings, mappings, limitations, and remediation recommendations are documented.
- 4
Review
Material findings and conclusions receive accountable human review before delivery.
- 5
Use
You may provide the assessment during relevant customer, partner, compliance, or security diligence.
The receiving organization determines what evidence it requires and whether the assessment is sufficient for its review.
05 / WHO IT IS FOR
Primary engagement
Organizations operating AI in high-trust environments
Building, buying, or operating AI where sensitive data, regulated workflows, customer trust, or third-party review make unsupported answers expensive.
Explore industriesDifferent environments create different evidence needs.
Healthcare, financial services, legal, education, and technology teams face different data boundaries, review triggers, and regulatory expectations.
Explore industry pages →Security, vendor-risk, privacy & compliance teams
Clear evidence presentation for professionals evaluating AI use and related safeguards.
06 / Independent review
Organization is useful. Judgment is different.
Compliance software can help organize controls, evidence, and workflows. An independent assessment applies contextual professional review to that material.
CapabilitySelf-assessmentGRC platformAyliea assessment
Inventory & structure
Yes
Yes
Yes
Evidence examined in context
Internal
Collected
Evaluated
AI-specific security analysis
Varies
Varies
Core scope
Professional judgment
Internal
No
Human review
Explicit findings & limitations
Varies
Workflow-driven
Documented
Remediation priorities
Internal
Workflow-driven
Evidence-backed
07 / METHODOLOGY
Transparent methodology.
Human judgment.
The assessment is evidence-led and maps relevant findings to established AI security and governance frameworks—such as NIST AI RMF and ISO/IEC 42001—plus applicable industry requirements when they belong in scope, rather than to a proprietary standard. Evidence-quality decisions and professional judgments remain documented, attributable, and subject to accountable human review.
Explore the methodology01Control domain
02Evidence
03Finding
04Severity
05Framework mapping
06Signed conclusion
08 / ACCOUNTABLE REVIEW
Independent does not mean anonymous.
Material findings and conclusions receive human review. The report identifies its evidence basis, limitations, scope, and sign-off so a customer can understand what was established and what was not.
About Ayliea and its assessment practice →09 / BEFORE YOU BOOK
See exactly what an assessment looks like.
Review the structure, evidence presentation, findings, framework mappings, limitations, and assessor sign-off before booking a call.
See a sample report10 / Engagement levels
Clear starting points. Scope still matters.
Final pricing depends on the number of AI systems, entities, evidence requirements, frameworks, and overall engagement complexity.
AI Security ReviewFrom $3,500For one defined AI system or workflow →AI Security AssessmentFrom $7,500Our primary evidence-backed engagement →Comprehensive AssessmentFrom $15,000For broader environments and evidence needs →Enterprise / Complex ScopeCustomFor multiple entities, specialized procedures, or recurring needs →
Discuss your scope 11 / Free resources
Not ready for an assessment? Start with something useful.
Use Ayliea’s practical resources to improve AI and cybersecurity decisions now. No assessment purchase required.
AI DATA SAFETY
Before You Paste It Into AI
A 60-second decision guide for employees handling company information around AI tools.
Open the guide →AI GOVERNANCEAI Use Policy Template
A practical starting point for defining approved tools, restricted data, responsibilities, and acceptable use.
Use the template →CYBERSECURITYSmall Business Security Checklist
Twelve foundational controls to review, prioritize, and assign before gaps become incidents.
Open the checklist →RESOURCE HUBCybersecurity Awareness Toolkit
A complete four-week campaign with employee guidance, manager actions, and print-ready resources.
Explore all resources →12 / Buyer questions
Before the assessment begins.
01What do we receive from an assessment?+
The engagement can produce a signed assessment with an executive summary, scoped AI inventory, data-flow documentation, evidence-backed findings, risk prioritization, framework references, limitations, and remediation recommendations. Exact contents depend on the agreed scope.
02Can we use the assessment during a customer, regulator, or partner security review?+
You may provide the assessment as evidence during relevant security, vendor-risk, procurement, regulatory, or partner diligence. Each reviewer decides what evidence it requires, who may rely on the report, and whether the assessment is sufficient.
03What procedures can be included?+
A scope may include document review, stakeholder interviews, configuration inspection, observation, demonstrations, and sampling. The written scope states which procedures were performed and which were not.
04Does the assessment include technical testing?+
Not automatically. Penetration testing, source-code review, model-performance evaluation, AI red-teaming, and continuous monitoring are excluded unless separately scoped and documented.
05How is missing or conflicting evidence handled?+
The report identifies unavailable, stale, conflicting, client-represented, and not-tested evidence. Conclusions are qualified when evidence quality or coverage limits confidence.
06How current is the assessment?+
The report is point-in-time. It states its assessment date or period, evidence cutoff, scope, and change-after-assessment boundary. Material changes may require an update or new assessment.
07Can Ayliea receive sensitive or regulated data?+
Do not send regulated records, personal data, credentials, questionnaires, or assessment evidence through the booking page or initial email. Ayliea avoids receiving unnecessary sensitive data, including PHI, and establishes engagement-specific transfer arrangements in writing.
08What does independent mean?+
Ayliea is an external, paid assessor rather than the organization being assessed or its regulator. Independence does not imply governmental authority. Potential conflicts are addressed during scoping, and commercial outcomes are not guaranteed.
09How are corrections handled?+
Factual errors and evidence references can be corrected through a documented review process. A request to change a commercial outcome does not require the assessor to change a supported professional conclusion.
10How long does an engagement take?+
Timing depends on the agreed scope, system count, entities, procedures, evidence readiness, and stakeholder availability. The written scope sets the expected assessment period and delivery plan before work begins.
11How much does an engagement cost?+
AI Security Reviews start at $3,500; AI Security Assessments start at $7,500; Comprehensive AI Security Assessments start at $15,000; Enterprise / Complex Scope engagements are custom-scoped. Final pricing is confirmed in a written scope before work begins.
12Do you certify HIPAA compliance?+
No. Ayliea does not provide a government-backed HIPAA certification, certify that an organization is HIPAA compliant, or guarantee compliance. Relevant findings may be mapped to applicable HIPAA Security Rule safeguards.
13What security frameworks do you assess against?+
Ayliea maps and aligns relevant findings to established AI security frameworks: NIST AI RMF 1.0, ISO/IEC 42001:2023, HIPAA Security Rule, OWASP LLM Top 10, MITRE ATLAS. These references frame the findings so a receiving reviewer can place them in a familiar context. Mapping and alignment are not certification or endorsement—Ayliea is not a certification body—and professional judgments and evidence-quality decisions remain explained and attributable to the assessor.
Next step
Need a clearer record of your AI security risk?
Use a 20-minute scoping call to clarify what the reviewer is asking for, what belongs in scope, and whether an independent Ayliea assessment is a fit.
- Clarify the review request
- Identify systems and evidence
- Define a defensible scope