AI Vendor Risk Questionnaire: [Vendor name] / [AI product]
Due diligence questionnaire and assessment record for a supplier of an
AI system, AI feature, general-purpose AI model or AI service. It
covers the vendor profile, system description, model provenance and
training data, data handling and residency, security (including the
OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications), evaluation evidence, bias and
fairness, transparency, human oversight, incident and change
notification, subprocessors and model dependencies, regulatory status
under the EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 as amended by
Regulation (EU) 2026/1744, including Article 25 value chain duties),
contract clauses, a scoring rubric and the decision. It supports
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Annex A controls A.10.2 and A.10.3 and the third
party actions of NIST AI 600-1 (GOVERN 6.1 and 6.2). Replace every
[bracketed] value and every row marked Example. This is a
documentation format, not legal advice.
Document control
| Field | Value |
|---|
| Document ID | [AIVRQ-001] |
| Version | [0.1] |
| Status | [Draft / Sent to vendor / Under review / Approved / Rejected / Superseded] |
| Owner | [@procurement-lead] |
| Approvers / reviewers | [@ai-governance-lead], [@security-lead], [@dpo], [@legal] |
| Last updated | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Classification | [Confidential] |
| Vendor | [Legal name, registered address] |
| Product and version | [Name, version, model IDs] |
| Internal use case | [UC-ID, short description] |
| Internal business owner | [@business-owner] |
| Vendor contact | [Name, role, email] |
| Date sent / date returned | YYYY-MM-DD / YYYY-MM-DD |
Approvals
| Role | Name | Decision | Date |
|---|
| Business owner | [@name] | [Accept / Accept with conditions / Reject] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| AI governance lead | [@name] | [Decision] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Security lead | [@name] | [Decision] | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Data protection officer | [@name] | [Opinion] | YYYY-MM-DD |
Revision history
| Version | Date | Author | Change summary |
|---|
| 0.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Questionnaire prepared and sent |
| 1.0 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Example: Scored and approved with conditions |
| 1.1 | YYYY-MM-DD | [@name] | Example: Re-assessed after vendor switched underlying foundation model |
Contents
1. Assessment scope and tier
| Factor | Answer | Points |
|---|
| Does the AI output affect decisions about individuals (employment, credit, access to services, health)? | [Yes / No] | Yes = 3 |
| Will personal, confidential or regulated data be sent to the vendor? | [None / Internal / Personal / Special category or secret] | 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 |
| Is the system customer-facing or public? | [Yes / No] | Yes = 2 |
| Can the system take actions in our systems (agents, tools, write access)? | [Yes / No] | Yes = 2 |
| Is the use case in an AI Act Annex III area or a regulated product? | [Yes / No / Unsure] | Yes or Unsure = 3 |
| Is the vendor a single point of failure for a critical process? | [Yes / No] | Yes = 2 |
| Total points | Tier | Sections required | Approver |
|---|
| 0 to 3 | Low | 2, 3, 6, 12, 15 | Business owner |
| 4 to 8 | Medium | 2 to 13, 15 | Business owner and AI governance lead |
| 9 or more | High | All sections, plus evidence review or call with vendor | AI governance board |
Tier assigned: Example: High (11 points: personal data 2,
customer-facing 2, tool actions 2, single point of failure 2, Annex III
status unsure 3).
2. Vendor profile
Answer guide for sections 2 to 15: answer each question in the Vendor
answer column and list supporting documents in the Evidence column. Mark
a question not applicable only with a reason.
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-PRF-01 | Legal entity, country of incorporation and the entity that will contract and process data | | |
| VQ-PRF-02 | Ownership, parent company and any change of control in the last 24 months | | |
| VQ-PRF-03 | Certifications held and their scope (for example ISO/IEC 42001, ISO/IEC 27001, SOC 2), with issuing body and expiry | | Certificates |
| VQ-PRF-04 | Name and role of the person accountable for AI governance | | |
| VQ-PRF-05 | Published AI policy or responsible AI principles | | Link |
| VQ-PRF-06 | Number of customers using this AI product in production and main sectors | | |
| VQ-PRF-07 | Relevant litigation, regulatory investigations or enforcement related to AI, privacy or security | | |
3. AI system description
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-SYS-01 | Intended purpose of the product and uses the vendor does not support or prohibits | | Terms of use |
| VQ-SYS-02 | AI techniques used (for example LLM, classifier, recommender), modalities and whether outputs are generated or selected | | |
| VQ-SYS-03 | Architecture: models, retrieval, tools or agents, guardrails, and which components run where | | Diagram |
| VQ-SYS-04 | Level of autonomy: can the system take actions without human approval, and which actions | | |
| VQ-SYS-05 | Configuration options available to customers (model choice, temperature, filters, logging, data retention) | | Admin guide |
| VQ-SYS-06 | Known limitations, failure modes and conditions where performance degrades | | Model or system card |
| VQ-SYS-07 | Product roadmap items in the next 12 months that change AI behaviour or data use | | |
4. Regulatory status and value chain roles
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-REG-01 | The vendor's role under the EU AI Act for this product (provider of an AI system, provider of a GPAI model, both, or not in scope) and the reasoning | | |
| VQ-REG-02 | Whether the product, or any intended use, is classified as high-risk (Article 6 and Annex III, or Annex I products), and the conformity assessment status | | Declaration of conformity, registration |
| VQ-REG-03 | Whether the vendor has screened the product against the prohibited practices in Article 5, including those added by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 | | |
| VQ-REG-04 | How the product supports transparency duties under Article 50 (interaction disclosure, machine-readable marking of synthetic content) | | |
| VQ-REG-05 | If a GPAI model is provided or integrated: who the model provider is, whether it signed the GPAI Code of Practice, and what Article 53 documentation is available to downstream providers | | Model documentation |
| VQ-REG-06 | Whether the GPAI model is classified as having systemic risk (Article 51) and how Article 55 duties are met | | |
| VQ-REG-07 | Information, technical access and assistance the vendor will provide if we become a provider under Article 25(1) or need to meet deployer duties under Article 26 | | Draft agreement |
| VQ-REG-08 | Willingness to sign a written agreement under Article 25(4) where we are the high-risk provider and the vendor supplies a component | | |
| VQ-REG-09 | Other AI laws the vendor complies with in markets where we operate (for example US state laws, Korea AI Basic Act) | | |
Internal note: record our own role for this use case: [Deployer /
Provider (Article 25) / Integrator of a GPAI model into our own system].
High-risk obligations apply from 2 December 2027 (Annex III) and 2
August 2028 (Annex I) under the amended Article 113; check the
consolidated text.
5. Model provenance and training data
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-MOD-01 | Models used: name, version, developer, and whether trained in-house, fine-tuned from a third-party model or used as is | | AI-BOM or model list |
| VQ-MOD-02 | Sources and types of training, fine-tuning and evaluation data, and the legal basis or licence for each | | Datasheet or data summary |
| VQ-MOD-03 | For GPAI models: the public summary of training content and the copyright policy, including how rights reservations (opt-outs) are honoured | | Links |
| VQ-MOD-04 | Whether customer data, prompts or outputs are used to train or improve models, by default or with opt-in, and how to opt out | | |
| VQ-MOD-05 | Data quality and curation steps, including removal of personal data, illegal content and duplicate or synthetic data | | |
| VQ-MOD-06 | Indemnity offered for intellectual property claims arising from outputs, and its conditions | | Contract draft |
| VQ-MOD-07 | How model versions are identified to customers and how long a version stays available | | |
6. Data handling, privacy and residency
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-DAT-01 | Data categories processed (prompts, files, outputs, embeddings, logs, telemetry) and the purpose for each | | Data flow description |
| VQ-DAT-02 | Locations where data is stored and processed, including model inference and support access; options to restrict region | | Data residency statement |
| VQ-DAT-03 | Retention periods for each data category, including abuse-monitoring logs, and deletion on request or contract end | | |
| VQ-DAT-04 | Role under data protection law (processor or controller) and the data processing agreement offered | | DPA |
| VQ-DAT-05 | International transfer mechanisms used | | |
| VQ-DAT-06 | Isolation between customers in shared models, caches, vector stores and fine-tuned adapters | | |
| VQ-DAT-07 | Human review of customer content by vendor staff: when, by whom, and how customers can opt out | | |
| VQ-DAT-08 | Support for data subject requests concerning data held in logs, embeddings or fine-tuned models | | |
7. Security
| ID | Question | OWASP reference | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-SEC-01 | Defences against direct and indirect prompt injection, and how they are tested | LLM01:2026 Prompt Injection | | |
| VQ-SEC-02 | Controls preventing disclosure of other customers' data, secrets or training data in outputs | LLM02:2026 Sensitive Information Disclosure | | |
| VQ-SEC-03 | Limits on actions, tools and permissions the system can use, and human approval for high-impact actions | LLM03:2026 Excessive Agency | | |
| VQ-SEC-04 | Supply chain controls for models, datasets, libraries and plugins (provenance checks, signing, SBOM or AI-BOM) | LLM04:2026 Supply Chain | | |
| VQ-SEC-05 | Protection against data and model poisoning in training, fine-tuning and retrieval sources | LLM05:2026 Data and Model Poisoning | | |
| VQ-SEC-06 | Rate limits, quotas and cost controls against resource exhaustion and denial of wallet | LLM06:2026 Unbounded Consumption | | |
| VQ-SEC-07 | Protection of system prompts, hidden instructions and other non-user context from extraction | LLM08:2026 Hidden Context Exposure | | |
| VQ-SEC-08 | Access control, tenant isolation and poisoning defences for embeddings and vector stores | LLM09:2026 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses | | |
| VQ-SEC-09 | Validation and encoding of model output before it reaches browsers, code execution or downstream systems | LLM10:2026 Improper Output Handling | | |
| VQ-SEC-10 | Measures against misleading or false output presented as fact | LLM07:2026 Misinformation | | |
| VQ-SEC-11 | Independent AI red teaming: scope, frequency, last date and summary of findings | | | Red team summary |
| VQ-SEC-12 | Protection of model weights and fine-tuned adapters from theft or tampering | | | |
| VQ-SEC-13 | Security logging available to customers (prompts, tool calls, guardrail events) and export format | | | |
8. Evaluation and performance evidence
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-EVL-01 | Evaluation methods and datasets used for accuracy, robustness and safety, and the latest results | | Evaluation report |
| VQ-EVL-02 | Results for tasks, languages and domains matching our use case | | |
| VQ-EVL-03 | Hallucination or groundedness measurement and current rates | | |
| VQ-EVL-04 | Whether we may run our own evaluation and red team tests against the product, and under what terms | | Terms |
| VQ-EVL-05 | Regression testing performed before model or prompt changes are released | | |
| VQ-EVL-06 | Production monitoring for drift, degradation and abuse, and what is shared with customers | | |
9. Bias and fairness
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-BIA-01 | Groups and attributes for which performance or outcome differences were tested | | |
| VQ-BIA-02 | Metrics used and the latest results, including known gaps | | |
| VQ-BIA-03 | Mitigations applied in data, model or post-processing | | |
| VQ-BIA-04 | Support for our own fairness testing (access, test data handling, result sharing) | | |
| VQ-BIA-05 | Language and accessibility coverage, and known weaker languages | | |
10. Transparency and documentation
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-TRN-01 | Model card, system card or instructions for use, and update frequency | | Documents |
| VQ-TRN-02 | Explanations available for individual outputs (citations, reasons, confidence) | | |
| VQ-TRN-03 | Content provenance features (watermarking, metadata, C2PA manifests) for generated media | | |
| VQ-TRN-04 | Customer-facing transparency material we may reuse | | |
| VQ-TRN-05 | Public transparency or safety reports | | Links |
11. Human oversight and control
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-HUM-01 | Features to review, approve, edit or reject outputs before they take effect | | |
| VQ-HUM-02 | Ability to stop, pause or roll back the system and its agents | | |
| VQ-HUM-03 | Controls to configure or disable features, tools and data sources per customer | | |
| VQ-HUM-04 | Guidance and training material for our staff who oversee the system | | |
12. Incident, vulnerability and change notification
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-INC-01 | Definition of an AI incident the vendor uses and examples | | |
| VQ-INC-02 | Notification deadline and channel for security incidents and AI incidents affecting us | | Contract or SLA |
| VQ-INC-03 | Process for serious incident reporting to authorities where the vendor is a provider under the AI Act, and how customers are informed | | |
| VQ-INC-04 | Vulnerability disclosure policy and bug bounty for AI issues | | Link |
| VQ-INC-05 | Advance notice period for model, prompt, guardrail or data use changes that may alter behaviour | | |
| VQ-INC-06 | Change log and version pinning options | | |
| VQ-INC-07 | Post-incident reports shared with customers | | Sample report |
13. Subprocessors and model dependencies
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-DEP-01 | List of subprocessors involved in AI processing (model providers, hosting, monitoring, human review), with location | | Subprocessor list |
| VQ-DEP-02 | Upstream GPAI models used, their providers and the contract terms that pass through to us | | |
| VQ-DEP-03 | Fallback if an upstream model is withdrawn, changed or degraded | | |
| VQ-DEP-04 | How subprocessors are assessed for AI risk, and notice given before adding one | | |
| VQ-DEP-05 | Open-source models or components used and how their licences and vulnerabilities are tracked | | |
14. Continuity and exit
| ID | Question | Vendor answer | Evidence |
|---|
| VQ-EXT-01 | Availability commitment and support hours | | SLA |
| VQ-EXT-02 | Business continuity and disaster recovery arrangements for AI services | | |
| VQ-EXT-03 | Export of our data, configurations, prompts, fine-tuned adapters and logs on exit, and format | | |
| VQ-EXT-04 | Deletion confirmation at contract end, including backups and fine-tuned models | | |
| VQ-EXT-05 | Notice period before discontinuing the product or a model version | | |
15. Contract clauses
| ID | Clause | Status | Contract reference |
|---|
| CL-01 | Purpose limitation: our data used only to provide the service; no training without written opt-in | [Agreed / Negotiating / Refused] | |
| CL-02 | Ownership of inputs and outputs, and licence to use outputs | | |
| CL-03 | Data residency, retention and deletion commitments | | |
| CL-04 | Security requirements, including AI-specific testing and right to receive test summaries | | |
| CL-05 | Notification of security and AI incidents within [x hours] | | |
| CL-06 | Advance notice of material model or behaviour changes and version pinning | | |
| CL-07 | Audit or evidence rights, including independent assessment reports | | |
| CL-08 | AI Act cooperation: documentation, information and assistance (Articles 25 and 26), and the Article 25(4) agreement where applicable | | |
| CL-09 | Transparency support: disclosure and marking features for Article 50 | | |
| CL-10 | Intellectual property indemnity for outputs | | |
| CL-11 | Subprocessor approval and flow-down of obligations | | |
| CL-12 | Service levels, support and continuity | | |
| CL-13 | Exit assistance, data export and deletion certificate | | |
| CL-14 | Liability allocation that does not shift vendor-caused AI harms to us unexpectedly | | |
16. Scoring rubric
Score each question: 0 = no answer or unacceptable; 1 = partial, no
evidence; 2 = adequate with evidence; 3 = strong, independently
verified. Section score = average of its questions times the weight.
| Section | Weight (High tier) Example | Average (0 to 3) | Weighted | Minimum to pass |
|---|
| 4 Regulatory status | 15 | | | 2.0 |
| 5 Provenance and training data | 10 | | | 1.5 |
| 6 Data handling | 15 | | | 2.0 |
| 7 Security | 20 | | | 2.0 |
| 8 Evaluation | 10 | | | 1.5 |
| 9 Bias and fairness | 5 | | | 1.0 |
| 10 Transparency | 5 | | | 1.5 |
| 11 Human oversight | 5 | | | 1.5 |
| 12 Incidents and change | 10 | | | 2.0 |
| 13 Dependencies | 5 | | | 1.5 |
| Total | 100 | | [0 to 300] | |
| Weighted total | Outcome |
|---|
| 240 or more, all minimums met | Accept |
| 180 to 239, or one minimum missed with a remediation plan | Accept with conditions |
| Below 180, or a minimum missed in sections 4, 6, 7 or 12 without a plan | Reject or escalate |
A "0" on any of VQ-REG-03, VQ-DAT-04, VQ-MOD-04 or VQ-INC-02 blocks
acceptance regardless of total.
17. Findings and remediation
| Finding ID | Question | Finding | Risk | Remediation | Owner | Due | Status |
|---|
| FND-001 (Example) | VQ-INC-05 | No advance notice of model changes; vendor updates the model behind a fixed API name | High | Contract clause CL-06 with 30 days' notice; our regression evaluation on each change | [@legal] | YYYY-MM-DD | Open |
| FND-002 (Example) | VQ-DAT-03 | Abuse-monitoring logs retained 30 days outside the EU | Medium | Zero-retention option enabled; DPA annex updated | [@dpo] | YYYY-MM-DD | Closed |
| FND-003 (Example) | VQ-SEC-11 | Red team summary older than 12 months | Medium | Vendor to share new summary; we run our own test before go-live | [@security-lead] | YYYY-MM-DD | Open |
18. Decision
| Item | Value |
|---|
| Tier | [Low / Medium / High] |
| Weighted score | [x / 300] |
| Outcome | [Accept / Accept with conditions / Reject] |
| Conditions | Example: FND-001 and FND-003 closed before production use |
| Our AI Act role confirmed | Example: Deployer; no Article 25 trigger because we do not rebrand or modify the system |
| Next review | Example: At renewal or on notice of a model change, whichever is first |
| Decided by | [@name], YYYY-MM-DD |
19. Source mapping
| Section | ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Annex A | NIST AI 600-1 suggested actions | EU AI Act |
|---|
| 1 Tier | A.10.3 | GV-6.1-005 | Art. 6, Annex III |
| 2 Vendor profile | A.10.3 | GV-6.1-007 | |
| 4 Regulatory status | A.10.2 | GV-6.1-009 | Art. 5, 25, 26, 50, 51, 53, 55 |
| 5 Provenance | A.7.3, A.7.5, A.10.3 | GV-6.1-009, MP-4.1-007 | Art. 53(1)(c), (d) |
| 6 Data handling | A.7.2, A.10.3 | GV-6.1-009 | Art. 10 (high-risk) |
| 7 Security | A.10.3 | GV-6.1-009, MG-3.1-002 | Art. 15 (high-risk) |
| 8 Evaluation | A.6.2.4, A.10.3 | MS-2.3-002, MG-3.1-005 | Art. 13, 15 |
| 10 Transparency | A.8.2, A.10.3 | MG-3.1-005 | Art. 13, 50, 53(1)(b) |
| 12 Incidents and change | A.8.4, A.10.2 | GV-6.2-003, GV-6.2-007 | Art. 26, 73 |
| 13 Dependencies | A.10.2, A.10.3 | GV-6.2-001, GV-6.2-004 | Art. 25(4), 53(1)(b) |
| 14 Continuity and exit | A.10.3 | GV-6.2-006 | |
| 15 Contract clauses | A.10.2 | GV-6.1-004, GV-6.1-006, GV-6.2-007 | Art. 25(4) |
20. Glossary and references
| Term | Meaning |
|---|
| Provider | Under the AI Act, the party that develops an AI system or GPAI model and places it on the market or puts it into service under its own name |
| Deployer | Under the AI Act, the party using an AI system under its authority in a professional activity |
| GPAI model | General-purpose AI model that can perform a wide range of tasks and be integrated into many systems |
| Value chain | The suppliers, components, models and data that together make up an AI system |
| AI-BOM | Machine-readable inventory of models, datasets and components in an AI system |
| Red teaming | Structured adversarial testing to find failures and vulnerabilities |
- Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2026/1744,
consolidated text on EUR-Lex; Articles 5, 6, 10, 13, 15, 25, 26, 50,
51, 53, 55, 73, 113
- NIST AI 600-1, Generative AI Profile, July 2024, GOVERN 6.1 and 6.2,
https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1
- ISO/IEC 42001:2023, Annex A controls A.10.2, A.10.3, A.10.4
- OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications 2026, OWASP GenAI Security Project,
https://genai.owasp.org/
- Related templates: Supplier security assessment,
Statement of Applicability (ISO/IEC 42001),
AI policy (ISO/IEC 42001),
Generative AI risk profile (
ai-data/genai-risk-profile),
AI risk assessment (ai-data/ai-risk-assessment),
AI use case intake (ai-data/ai-use-case-intake)
Standard and licence note
Based on Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the AI Act) as amended by Regulation
(EU) 2026/1744, in particular Article 25 on responsibilities along the
AI value chain, and on NIST AI 600-1 (July 2024), GOVERN 6.1 and 6.2
suggested actions; EU legislative texts are free to reuse and NIST
publications are public domain in the United States. Provisions and
actions are summarised in original wording. ISO/IEC 42001:2023 is a
copyrighted standard and is cited by control number only, with no text
reproduced. Section 7 references the OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications
2026 by the OWASP GenAI Security Project, licensed under Creative
Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/); only entry IDs and
short names are used, with attribution, and any OWASP descriptive
material you adapt into this template must be shared under CC BY-SA 4.0.
Check the current consolidated text, NIST publication and OWASP list
before use. This is a documentation format, not legal advice. Template
licence: MIT.