Ansvar brings verified law and security intelligence into Claude, ChatGPT, Copilot Studio, Cursor, or your agents. Add SIS-licensed standards and, on Team and Company, paragraph-cited evidence from your documents. Run structured gap analyses, DPIAs, threat models, and TARAs. Each factual finding cites its evidence or stays unresolved.
€0 to start · no card · no Ansvar-hosted model
From a captured workflow run
The policy defines an annual risk review, but no documented method, acceptance criteria, or reassessment trigger after a significant change.
Both entry points use the same source contract, structured execution, and review gates. Team and Company can ground supported workflows in customer documents.
Assess the documents your team uses against DORA, NIS2, GDPR, and licensed ISO standards. Get assessed requirements, supporting evidence, gaps, remediation, and named unresolved points.
Assess software, vehicles, machinery, robotics, medical devices, and OT against product law, licensed standards where entitled, and served threat sources.
Browse the legal sources, standards, and available workflows for each sector.
Explore all sectors →The gateway carries served evidence into a structured assessment and records where the evidence stops.
| Typical starting point | Ansvar carries forward |
|---|---|
| Regulatory feed | Official records and coverage state for a cited impact review. |
| GRC record | Customer documents and served sources inside a supported assessment. |
| Method-specific tool | Supported security, privacy, and compliance workflows over one document library. |
| General-purpose AI | Factual findings cited to served evidence or left unresolved. |
Describe one processing activity. Ansvar checks the GDPR baseline and routes the assessment to the national trigger evidence available for each confirmed jurisdiction.
Published lists, indicative guidance, an advisory draft, and a jurisdiction without a national-list mechanism do not become the same checkbox. Each source keeps its status, publisher, citation, and verification record. Unsupported conclusions stay unresolved.
| Jurisdiction | National evidence path | Status preserved |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | DSK Muss-Liste under Article 35(4), version 1.1 | published national material |
| Estonia | Isikuandmete töötleja üldjuhend, chapter 5 | indicative authority material |
| Cyprus | Indicative DPIA list submitted under Article 35(4) | advisory draft |
| Switzerland | Federal Act on Data Protection, Articles 22 and 23 | statutory no-list determination |
The sample below comes from a captured Ansvar workflow. It binds a customer document to primary law and licensed ISO controls, then records the finding, the evidence, and the gap in one report.
POL-BLTK-2026-02, split into hash-anchored paragraphs.
NIS2 Article 21 is fetched from the official EU source and cited in the finding.
Selected ISO/IEC 27001 clauses and controls are resolved through the SIS add-on.
The gap-analysis workflow applies the same review stages to each requirement.
The policy defines an annual risk review, but no documented method, acceptance criteria, or reassessment trigger after a significant change.
We publish the scope of each engagement and keep customer names private.
The team used Ansvar to assess the GDPR baseline and Germany's national DPIA criteria for a pre-launch system.
The company worked with Ansvar on a system threat model and used the report in work subject to regulatory requirements.
Run Ansvar on a real compliance or product-security decision. We will identify where the method, evidence, integration, or report needs work, then agree the pilot scope and acceptance criteria with you.
Discuss a design-partner pilotTeam and Company store policies, contracts, architecture documents, and prior reports in one tenant library. Bind the relevant documents to each supported run. Completed reports remain immutable; start a new run when the system or evidence changes.
Bind the relevant documents to each new run. The workflow records the segments, source citations, judgments, and unresolved gaps it used.
Ansvar reports the official record and its coverage window. Your agent can combine that record with company context and prepare a cited impact-review queue. A human approves any resulting change.
A reviewer can open the source behind a factual finding, check the customer document it rests on, and see where the available evidence stopped. Source health qualifies an empty result, and analytical judgments remain labelled as judgments.
| Assurance level | What you can verify | Availability |
|---|---|---|
| Source-auditable | Source, publisher, licence, lookup, and freshness context for the finding. | All plans |
| Document-auditable | Customer evidence pinned to hash-anchored paragraphs. | Team and Company |
| Cryptographically auditable | Signed, tenant-specific receipts and an exportable audit ledger. | Company |
Dated changes to the evidence layer, workflows, accounts, and platform.
Microsoft 365 Copilot users can add the Ansvar agent from the Teams store; it answers from the same cited gateway as every other client.
Italy joins the live jurisdictions on the coverage page: consolidated national legislation from Normattiva plus Italy's data-protection corpus, after a first-hand review of the Italian source licence.
Ontario joins the gateway as Canada's first provincial corpus: consolidated statutes and regulations from e-Laws, in English and French, each answer cited to the official King's Printer source. Federal and British Columbia coverage refreshed in the same release.
Start with the free evidence layer, or scope a finished assessment with an Ansvar practitioner.
Not sure it fits? Have your AI check the fit — one evaluation pack, a verdict against documented coverage, “no current fit” included.
