Vendor AI due diligence
Most AI vendor questionnaires ask about security and privacy and stop. The questions that decide your regulatory position are different ones, and the cheapest time to ask them is before signature, because afterwards they are a variation.
The eleven questions
| Ask | Because |
|---|---|
| Are you the provider of this system under the EU AI Act? | If they hesitate, they have not done the analysis, and you may be the provider. |
| What is the registered intended purpose? | It bounds what you may use it for without becoming a provider yourself under Art. 25. |
| Have you classified it, and will you share the assessment? | Art. 6(4) requires them to have one before market placement. |
| Will you supply Annex IV inputs? | You need them if Art. 25 ever moves you into the provider role. |
| What is the declared accuracy, and on what population? | Art. 13 requires it in the instructions for use. Ask when it was last measured in production. |
| What are the known limitations and foreseeable risk circumstances? | Art. 13 content, and an input to your Art. 27 FRIA if you owe one. |
| Which logs do you retain, and for how long? | Arts. 19 and 26(6) both bite, each for logs "under their control". In SaaS the deployer often holds none. |
| How do we obtain logs within two days? | Art. 73’s shortest clock. A support ticket is not a mechanism. |
| What is your incident notification commitment to us? | Your clock and theirs are different clocks. |
| Does the contract restrict us from modifying the intended purpose? | Where the provider clearly specified the system is not to be changed into a high-risk one, their duty to supply information changes. |
| What third-party or foundation models are inside it? | You cannot complete a technical file for something you cannot see into. |
Where this usually goes next
Three situations account for most people reading this page. Each has a different answer.
A deal is blocked on an AI questionnaire
Legal will not sign until you can evidence how AI is governed. HumanAudit’s AI Trust Package is a fixed $3,500 over five business days: a public trust page, a pre-filled SIG Lite / CAIQ / SSPA Section K questionnaire bank, and your AI inventory and classification.
You need ISO/IEC 42001 documentation
23 clause-mapped AIMS documents with all 38 Annex A controls pre-populated, editable and yours to keep, from $199. Or score your gaps first: 18 questions, free, no signup to begin.
You are not sure what reaches you
Twenty minutes with the founder. No prep, no deck, straight to the person accountable for the work. If none of this applies to you, you get told that on the call.
This reference is published by HumanAudit Inc. Not a law firm, not an accredited certification body, not a registered auditor. We build documentation, your counsel interprets it, and an accredited body of your choosing certifies you. How this is funded →
The answers that should worry you
Expert analysis. Four responses that indicate the vendor has not done the work:
- “We are ISO 42001 certified, so we are AI Act compliant.” Certification is not conformity. Why →
- “The deadline is 2027, so it does not apply yet.” Art. 50 and Art. 4 are live now, and Art. 6(4) requires the classification before market placement.
- “We only provide decision support, so it is not high-risk.” Annex III is drafted around activities, and profiling removes the derogation. Art. 6(3) →
- “High-risk breaches carry €35M or 7%.” They carry €15M or 3%. Getting the tier wrong signals how much of the rest is memorised.
What belongs in the contract, not the questionnaire
- Role allocation per system, and what happens if Art. 25 triggers.
- Information supply: Annex IV inputs, declared metrics, the change envelope, Art. 13 instructions.
- Log access, who holds what, retention, and a retrieval mechanism that works inside two days.
- Incident notification timing that fits Art. 73 rather than a generic SLA.
- Modification restrictions, deliberately chosen in both directions.
A questionnaire answer is a representation. A contract term is a remedy. Contract clauses →
Status labels on this page
Verified fact: Article references and dates cited above, checked against the consolidated Regulation.
Expert analysis: The tables, tiering and assessments on this page are our practice, not a standard.
Unsettled: Procurement practice is not codified and varies by buyer. Verify specific programme requirements against the buyer's own published materials.
Ask before signature
Every item here is cheap pre-contract and expensive afterwards. The vendors who answer well are demonstrating something useful about how they run; the ones who cannot are telling you what your own compliance work will cost.
Not sure where you sit?
The classifier maps your system against Articles 5, 6, 50 and Annex III. Twelve questions, no email.
Frequently asked
What should you ask an AI vendor before buying?
Whether they are the provider under the EU AI Act, the registered intended purpose, whether they have a documented Article 6(4) classification assessment, whether they will supply Annex IV inputs, the declared accuracy and the population it was measured on, known limitations, which logs they retain and for how long, how you obtain logs within two days for incident reporting, their incident notification commitment, whether the contract restricts you from modifying the intended purpose, and what third-party or foundation models are inside the system.
Can a vendor make us responsible for EU AI Act compliance?
Not by contract. Regulatory obligations attach to the person the Regulation names. But Article 25 can make you a provider by operation of law if you put your name on the system, modify it substantially, or change its intended purpose so that it becomes high-risk. That is a consequence of what you do, not of what the contract says.