A few quick questions to see where your system lands, what obligations follow, and whether a FRIA is on the cards. Indicative only, not legal advice.
About 3 minutes, 6 questions
The EU AI Act sorts AI systems by risk, and the high-risk category brings real obligations. The catch is that classification does not hinge on whether a human makes the final call. It hinges on what the system is used for. This quick check looks at what your AI does, who it affects, and how ready you are, then points you toward likely high-risk, lighter transparency duties, or nothing much for now. It is a starting point, not a binding assessment.
Find out whether your AI is likely high-risk, subject to lighter transparency duties, or outside the high-risk list for now.
No article numbers. Everyday questions about what your AI actually does and who it affects.
Written for SaaS and AI product teams, whether you build the system, deploy it, or both.
Built by Ross Saunders, CIPP/E, from 15 years of privacy and cybersecurity work with software teams.
No. It is an indicative check to point you in the right direction. The EU AI Act has real nuance, and a full assessment, or your own counsel, should confirm where you actually land.
A provider builds or substantially changes an AI system. A deployer uses one under its own authority. Plenty of companies are both, and the obligations differ, which is why the check asks.
A Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment. It looks at how a high-risk AI system could affect people's rights. It is mandatory for some deployers and good practice for others, and it overlaps heavily with a DPIA you may already be doing.
About three minutes. A handful of questions about your system, plus a couple about where your users are.