Skip to main content
Colorado ADMT: 1 Jan 2027 · EU high-risk: 2 Dec 2027 (Annex III); 2 Aug 2028 (Annex I)
Home / Guides and tools / RAG / Vector Trust & Data Disclosure Check
RAG disclosure and poisoning governance assessment

RAG / Vector Trust & Data Disclosure Check

Assess in under 5 minutes whether the current RAG and vector pipeline could leak sensitive information or trust poisoned content.

4-5 minutes Browser-only scoring No stored answers Retrieval trust and data disclosure

This screen is for teams using knowledge bases, retrieval-enabled copilots, or internal assistants who need a governance answer before broader rollout or higher-sensitivity data access.

  • Checks source trust, ingestion review, data-classification boundaries, leakage control, takedown readiness, and answer traceability.
  • Flags whether the retrieval posture is controlled, constrained, materially risky, or not governable for enterprise use.
  • ACT includes an agent incident containment and recovery runbook. Your team must test the actual stop procedure, downstream effects and restart conditions.
Start the assessment See ACT
Enterprise retrieval governance illustration showing trusted and untrusted knowledge sources, access boundaries, takedown controls, and evidence-based disclosure investigation readiness.
Enterprise retrieval governance illustration showing trusted and untrusted knowledge sources, access boundaries, takedown controls, and evidence-based disclosure investigation readiness.
OWASP-aligned data-trust screen

What this assessment evaluates

This assessment classifies the current posture quickly, surface the biggest gaps, and surface governance gaps and recommend the appropriate implementation path.

What this tool evaluates

This assessment evaluates whether the current retrieval stack can defend source trust, data boundaries, leakage controls, takedown discipline, and investigation traceability.

What a tighter-boundaries result does not mean

It does not mean the retrieval system is broken. It means wider rollout should wait until trust boundaries, evidence, or review discipline are stronger.

How ACT supports the next review

The missing value is data handling policy, disclosure response procedure, evidence discipline, and formal impact review. ACT is one editable AI Controls Toolkit with eleven core files across eight workflow areas. It supports evidence collection and human decisions; it does not enforce controls or certify compliance.

Question 1 of 120% complete
Question 1 of 12

What this result should change

This section highlights the key governance gaps the assessment identified and recommends appropriate next steps.

What this tool evaluates

This assessment evaluates whether the current retrieval stack can defend source trust, data boundaries, leakage controls, takedown discipline, and investigation traceability.

What a tighter-boundaries result does not mean

It does not mean the retrieval system is broken. It means wider rollout should wait until trust boundaries, evidence, or review discipline are stronger.

How ACT supports the next review

The missing value is data handling policy, disclosure response procedure, evidence discipline, and formal impact review. ACT is one editable AI Controls Toolkit with eleven core files across eight workflow areas. It supports evidence collection and human decisions; it does not enforce controls or certify compliance.

Where to go next

When the assessment identifies control gaps, discuss the required scope and evidence with Move78. ACT includes an editable board oversight deck and written briefing, supported by intake, ownership, supplier and executive decision records. Your team gathers the evidence and records the next action.

ACT

Get the implementation documents, procedures, evidence assets, and governance pack this free screen intentionally does not generate.

OWASP Top 10 For Large Language Model Applications

Read the OWASP Top 10 For Large Language Model Applications guide to understand the underlying control themes and risk categories.

AI Governance

Read the governance guide for the policy, ownership, and control architecture behind this screen.

Agentic AI Incident Response What To Log Who Approves Shutdown

Read the incident-response guide for shutdown, logging, evidence, and escalation discipline.

This page is informational only. It does not provide legal advice, compliance certification, or an audit conclusion.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What does this tool check?

It checks whether your retrieval layer is governed well enough to trust the sources, control disclosure risk, and explain how retrieved content influences outputs and actions.

Who should use this screen?

Use it if your AI system retrieves documents, knowledge-base content, external references, vector-search results, or mixed trusted and untrusted sources before generating an answer or action.

Does this tool scan our vector database or documents?

No. It does not inspect your content, index, or embeddings. It is a governance assessment that helps you judge whether source trust, ownership, access, and review controls are mature enough.

Why does source ownership matter so much?

Because retrieval becomes harder to trust when nobody clearly owns the source, approves ingestion, or can explain how stale, poisoned, or sensitive content is handled.

What does a weak result usually mean?

Usually it means the retrieval layer is pulling from broad or poorly governed sources, with weak trust tiering, limited disclosure review, or missing evidence on what content can influence outputs.

Does this tool store or transmit my answers?

No. This tool runs entirely in your browser. Your selections are not stored, synced, exported, or transmitted by the page itself.

Source review dates are stated in the relevant guides. 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.