Assess in under 5 minutes whether the organization is ready to red-team AI systems properly or is deploying faster than it can test.
This screen is for teams that want a governance answer on testing readiness, provider evaluation, and remediation discipline before production pressure outruns assurance.

This assessment classifies the current posture quickly, surface the biggest gaps, and surface governance gaps and recommend the appropriate implementation path.
This assessment evaluates whether the organization has the governance foundations to run meaningful AI red teaming and evaluate providers or tooling without wasting time.
A pilot-only result does not mean testing should stop. The result means the assurance model needs stronger scenarios, better evidence discipline, or tighter provider review before scaling.
The missing value is procedure, provider diligence, remediation evidence, and executive pause rules. That implementation depth sits in AI Controls Professional.
This section highlights the key governance gaps the assessment identified and recommends appropriate next steps.
This assessment evaluates whether the organization has the governance foundations to run meaningful AI red teaming and evaluate providers or tooling without wasting time.
A pilot-only result does not mean testing should stop. The result means the assurance model needs stronger scenarios, better evidence discipline, or tighter provider review before scaling.
The missing value is procedure, provider diligence, remediation evidence, and executive pause rules. That implementation depth sits in AI Controls Professional.
When the assessment reveals structural control gaps requiring policy, procedure, evidence, lifecycle discipline, or implementation ownership, AI Controls Professional provides the full implementation evidence pack.
Get the implementation documents, procedures, evidence assets, and governance pack this free screen intentionally does not generate.
Read the OWASP Top 10 For Large Language Model Applications guide to understand the underlying control themes and risk categories.
Read the OWASP Top 10 Agentic AI guide to understand the underlying control themes and risk categories.
Use the supplier-governance guide to strengthen review criteria before approval.
This assessment evaluates whether your organization is governance-ready for AI red teaming: scope, ownership, threat scenarios, remediation discipline, evidence standards, and vendor decision criteria.
Use it if you are preparing to red team an AI system, selecting an external provider, or trying to decide whether your current testing posture is credible enough for higher-risk deployment.
No. It does not simulate attacks or test the system directly. The results indicate whether your governance and buying posture is mature enough to run or commission red teaming properly.
Named owners, a defined test scope, documented abuse cases, escalation paths, pass-fail logic, remediation tracking, and a decision framework for when testing blocks rollout.
Bring in an external provider when the system has meaningful business impact, external exposure, sensitive data access, tool use, or a regulator-facing use case and your internal testing discipline is limited.
No. This tool runs entirely in your browser. Your selections are not stored, synced, exported, or transmitted by the page itself.
Source and review note: This page was last reviewed on 6 May 2026 against the current Move78 public site baseline and relevant official or authoritative sources where laws, standards, frameworks, cybersecurity controls, product scope, pricing, support policy, or implementation guidance are discussed. It provides operational implementation guidance and product information only; it is not legal advice, tax advice, audit assurance, certification assurance, conformity-assessment advice, buyer-approval assurance, or security assurance. Validate legal, regulatory, contractual, tax, audit, and security decisions with qualified professionals.