Who is ShieldAI built for?

Compliance officers, CISOs, and GCs at financial services firms — banks, PE firms, hedge funds, RIAs, insurance companies, and fintechs. Anyone responsible for vetting AI tools that touch client data or regulated information.

What financial regulations do you cover?

SOC 2, SOX, GLBA, FINRA rules (3110, 3120), SEC guidance on AI use, CCPA, GDPR, and the EU AI Act. Enterprise plans support custom frameworks for internal policies and state regulations.

Can it handle SEC examination requests?

Yes. Every action is logged with timestamps, users, and rationale. Export full audit trails as PDF or CSV — formatted for SEC and FINRA examiners.

How does it handle material nonpublic information (MNPI)?

ShieldAI flags any AI tool that could access or process MNPI. Tools with MNPI exposure are auto-escalated to high-risk review with mandatory compliance officer sign-off.

Do you integrate with our existing tools?

Professional plans include Slack, Microsoft Teams, Jira, and ServiceNow integrations. Enterprise plans get API access for connecting to internal compliance systems, deal management platforms, and portfolio tools.

What about vendor due diligence?

ShieldAI auto-enriches vendor data — SOC 2 reports, data residency, sub-processors, breach history, and terms of service analysis. Replaces the manual DDQ process for AI vendors.

How to Build an AI Tool Approval Process for Financial Services

Your analysts want AI tools. Your CCO needs to vet them. Your examiners need documentation. Here's how to build a process that serves everyone.

The Two Traps

Too slow: A 6-week review process that analysts bypass entirely. You get documentation for the 3 tools that went through the process, and zero visibility into the 30+ tools people actually use.

Too loose: An informal "ask your manager" approach with no documentation, no consistency, and no audit trail. Works until an SEC examiner asks how you evaluate AI tools.

The Right Approach: Risk-Tiered Review

Tier 1: Low Risk (Auto-Approve)

No client data access
No MNPI exposure
General productivity tools
Example: Grammarly for internal emails
Review time: Instant with conditions

Tier 2: Medium Risk (Fast Track)

Internal data only
No regulated data
Established vendor with SOC 2
Example: GitHub Copilot for internal dev
Review time: 24-48 hours (compliance officer)

Tier 3: High Risk (Full Review)

Client data access
Financial data or PII
New or unvetted vendor
Example: AI tool processing client portfolio data
Review time: 1-2 weeks (compliance + legal + IT)

Tier 4: Critical (Committee Review)

MNPI exposure
Client-facing AI decisions
Regulatory reporting involvement
Example: AI-powered investment recommendations
Review time: 2-4 weeks (compliance committee)

The Intake Form for Financial Services

Every request should capture:

Tool name and vendor
Use case — What will you use it for?
Data classification — Public / Internal / Client / MNPI
Client exposure — Will clients see AI output?
Regulatory scope — Does this touch reporting, recommendations, or disclosures?
Business justification — Why this tool vs alternatives?

Financial Services Review Checklist

[ ] Vendor has SOC 2 Type II
[ ] Data processing agreement (DPA) executed
[ ] Data residency meets requirements (US-only for some regulations)
[ ] No training on firm data (or contractual opt-out)
[ ] GLBA safeguards requirements met
[ ] No MNPI exposure (or adequate controls)
[ ] No conflicts of interest
[ ] Client disclosure requirements met
[ ] SOX implications assessed (if applicable)
[ ] Vendor financial stability verified
[ ] Exit strategy defined (data portability)

Making It Stick

Make it fast — auto-approve Tier 1 tools same-day
Make it visible — publish approved tools list firm-wide
Make it easy — simple intake form, not a 40-field DDQ
Make it auditable — every decision logged for examiners

ShieldAI automates this entire process for financial services firms →