David G.

Commented on Would an AI Trust Profile Help Startups Communicat...·Posted inGeneral Discussion

Dee B. Yeah, I agree with that. I don’t see this as replacing SOC 2. More that there’s an awkward phase before it where buyers are already asking AI/data handling questions, but teams aren’t mature enough for a full compliance program yet. That’s the gap I’m trying to understand better.

Commented on Would an AI Trust Profile Help Startups Communicat...·Posted inGeneral Discussion

David G.

Jared R. Sort of, but more AI trust-focused than traditional readiness. Less “manage your controls” More:

explain your AI system clearly
map vendors + boundaries
show how customer data is handled
prove certain AI controls actually exist
AI Pentest

Posted in General Discussion·

David G.

Would an AI Trust Profile Help Startups Communicate Data and Compliance Before SOC 2?

Curious if this would actually be useful or not. I keep seeing AI startups hit a weird stage before SOC 2 where buyers start asking things like:

where customer data goes
which AI vendors touch it
whether prompts/models are used for training
what controls actually exist around AI usage

Most teams can explain it internally. Very few have something simple they can actually show. I’m thinking about building a lightweight/free AI Trust Profile that could include:

AI vendor + data boundary mapping
buyer-facing AI trust answers
AI/security posture scans
cloud/repo/integration trust signals
evidence that certain controls actually exist

Not a full GRC platform. More like “trust readiness before formal compliance.” Would this actually help in real sales conversations, or are most teams still not feeling this yet?

4Comments

Posted in Startup Pitches·

David G.

Feedback Request: Join Our Free Beta for AI Readiness Program to Improve AI Feature Releases

Hey everyone, I need feedback on our next release: RevGenius founders / operators: We’re opening a free beta for a new AI Readiness program and wanted to offer it first here. Teams are shipping AI features quickly, but the release process is often informal. Before launch, common gaps tend to be:

PII exposure risk not reviewed
prompt security not tested
logging not fully enabled
outputs not systematically tested
no human fallback for edge cases
no clear approval owner

AI Readiness is built for teams that want a cleaner release process as AI moves into production. Goal: help startups launch AI with clearer controls, stronger accountability, and more confidence. We’re looking for a small group of RG members to join the open beta and give direct feedback. If you’re actively shipping AI features now, comment or DM me.

0Comments

Posted in Revops·

David G.

When Do Security, AI/Data, and Procurement Concerns First Arise in B2B SaaS AI Feature Deals?

For founders shipping AI features into B2B SaaS: What starts showing up first in deals? A) Security questionnaires B) AI/data handling questions C) Procurement concerns D) Nothing yet, still too early Trying to understand when trust pressure actually begins.

0Comments

Commented on What Typically Comes First in Mid-Market SaaS Deal...·Posted inGeneral Discussion

David G.

Eric K. So less of a hard blocker, more of a confidence signal to keep momentum moving. I think a lot of trust requests start as simple checkboxes, then turn into questionnaires and deeper reviews as deals progress. Are you seeing that happen more now?

Commented on What Typically Comes First in Mid-Market SaaS Deal...·Posted inGeneral Discussion

David G.

Matthew D. Definitely. I’d expect martech to get hit earlier on customer data / privacy, while devtools may get more questions around access, integrations, and internal security posture. The trigger changes a lot depending on what data you touch and where you sit in the stack. What have you seen?

About

Company
VerifAI Trust Company
LinkedIn
LinkedIn