AI Registry & Discovery
Inventory models and AI systems, track ownership, versions, provenance, dependencies, deployment targets, and security state.
GlassCage.AI discovers, isolates, attacks, and governs AI systems before they enter trusted environments — evaluating technical security alongside legal, licensing, privacy, supply-chain, and policy risk, then continuously reassessing trust after deployment.
GlassCage evaluates the entire AI system — models, artifacts, prompts, data flows, agents, tools, MCP integrations, runtime behavior, licenses, legal terms, privacy obligations, policies, and the evidence needed for enterprise approval.
Inventory models and AI systems, track ownership, versions, provenance, dependencies, deployment targets, and security state.
Hold untrusted artifacts outside production while validating files, model packages, metadata, malware indicators, and supply-chain provenance.
Execute AI components inside controlled environments to observe runtime behavior, network activity, unsafe calls, and sandbox escape attempts.
Run repeatable attack suites for jailbreaks, prompt injection, system-prompt extraction, policy bypass, data exfiltration, and adversarial behavior.
Assess tool permissions, MCP servers, agent chains, indirect prompt injection, confused-deputy risks, privilege boundaries, and unsafe automation.
Review model and dataset licenses, commercial-use restrictions, third-party terms, IP and provenance concerns, privacy obligations, data handling, and organizational AI policies.
Map assessment evidence to enterprise governance requirements and relevant AI regulatory obligations, with findings routed to the right Security, Legal, Privacy, Risk, or Compliance owner.
Turn technical and governance findings into traceable evidence and remediation workflows. GlassCage supports expert review — it does not replace legal counsel or silently approve risk.
Static scanning alone cannot tell you what an AI system will do under pressure. GlassCage combines artifact inspection with controlled adversarial execution.
$ glasscage assess system customer-support-agent
[01/07] artifact provenance .............. PASS
[02/07] malware & package inspection ..... PASS
[03/07] prompt injection suite ........... 3 FINDINGS
[04/07] secret leakage .................... PASS
[05/07] tool privilege abuse ............. 1 FINDING
[06/07] MCP trust boundary ............... PASS
[07/07] sandbox escape .................... PASS
Assessment complete: 4 findings require remediation
An AI system can resist attacks and still create unacceptable legal, licensing, privacy, contractual, or regulatory exposure. GlassCage brings those concerns into the same assessment and approval workflow.
$ glasscage govern customer-support-agent
[01/06] model license ...................... PASS
[02/06] dataset provenance ................. REVIEW
[03/06] third-party terms .................. PASS
[04/06] privacy & data handling ............ PASS
[05/06] enterprise AI policy ............... PASS
[06/06] regulatory evidence ................ 2 GAPS
Governance review: Legal / Compliance approval required
GC-SYS-000184 · Version 3.7.2
The GlassCage AI Trust Passport gives Security, Engineering, Legal, Privacy, Compliance, Risk, Governance, and Audit teams a shared answer to one question: Can this AI system be trusted and approved for enterprise use?
Each passport summarizes identity, assessment scope, technical security, privacy, legal and licensing review, supply-chain posture, governance findings, retained evidence, named human approvals, trust status, and reassessment date.
Get early access to AI Trust Passports →Use the GlassCage SaaS control plane for governance and orchestration, with optional private runners inside customer-controlled environments for sensitive or quarantined testing.
Registry · Policies · Legal Review · Campaigns · Findings · Evidence · Approvals · Trust Passports
Quarantine · Scanning · Sandbox · Red Team · Runtime Inspection
Assessment begins outside the trusted production boundary.
Security decisions are backed by reproducible tests and retained evidence.
Automation informs the gate. It does not silently approve risk.
Material change, drift, or new intelligence can trigger reassessment.
We’re working with Security, Legal, Privacy, Compliance, Risk, Governance, and AI leaders who want a defensible trust gate before AI systems reach production.