Trust & Frameworks
Governance you can point to, not just claim.
We didn't retrofit compliance language onto three products after the fact. Every control below maps to a named framework, and every framework maps to a specific mechanism you can inspect.
Three frameworks. Named mechanisms.
These aren't badges on a footer. Each one shapes how a specific product behaves.
Structures how we categorize agent risk, from discovery through continuous monitoring. Quin's behavioral baselining and drift detection map directly to the RMF's Measure and Manage functions.
Catalogs the adversarial techniques we test against: prompt injection, model exfiltration, supply chain compromise. Aegis's identity boundaries and Quin's threat detection are built against named ATLAS tactics, not generic anomaly scoring.
The baseline risk taxonomy for LLM-integrated applications. Drona's runtime action enforcement is designed specifically to close LLM01 (prompt injection) and LLM08 (excessive agency) at the execution layer, not just the model layer.
What "governed" means in practice.
Every access decision is logged
Aegis writes an append-only audit ledger for every permission grant, denial, and scope change, attributable to a specific agent identity rather than a shared service account.
Enforcement is structural, not advisory
Drona validates actions against a workflow contract before they execute. A policy that can be silently bypassed by a misconfigured agent isn't a control; it's a suggestion.
Visibility doesn't require instrumentation
Quin scans source code and running environments without agent-side changes, so shadow agents (the ones nobody registered) still show up.
Want the mechanism, not the marketing?
Talk to our team about how Quin, Aegis, and Drona map to your existing compliance requirements and audit process.