An AI-native AI governance firm
We do your AI governance, and we sign off on it.
Firemark is an AI governance firm for companies deploying AI in regulated markets worldwide. We assess your AI against the rules that apply, tell you exactly what's risky, and hand you a signed, audit-ready assessment in four weeks — the answer your board, your regulator, and your enterprise buyers are asking for.
Delivered through Glasswing, our AI system that handles the operational work of an assessment so a senior risk officer can focus on the judgment — and the signature.
Fixed fee · Four weeks · Signed attestation · EU AI Act · GDPR · NIST AI RMF · ISO/IEC 42001
The differentiator
They assist.
We sign.
We built AI governance delivery as an AI-native firm from the ground up — not a consultancy that bolted AI onto billable hours, and not a software platform that bolted a signature onto a dashboard.
Most AI advisors hand you a framework and a disclaimer. The judgment stays yours, the exposure stays yours, and the deck sits on a shelf. Firemark works the other way. A named practitioner performs the assessment, reaches a conclusion, and puts a signature on it — an attestation identifying who did the work, the framework versions applied, the evidence reviewed, and the risks accepted or flagged.
That signature is the product. It is what turns an opinion into a document your audit committee can file, your regulator can read, and your enterprise buyer's security team can accept in place of another 200-question spreadsheet.
What the signature means →The flagship
The Governance Teardown
One assessment. Four weeks. A fixed fee, a defined scope, and a signed report at the end. It is the front door to everything we do.
Weeks 1–2
Inventory and classification
Every AI system in use — including shadow AI — mapped, then classified on a two-axis model: regulatory exposure and operational consequence.
Week 3
Assessment against the rules that apply
Your systems tested against the specific, versioned obligations that govern them in your jurisdiction — EU AI Act, GDPR, NIST AI RMF 1.0, ISO/IEC 42001, sector rules, and enterprise diligence standards — with each framework pinned to the version in force on the date of review.
Week 4
The signed deliverable
A risk-ranked findings report, remediation sequence, and a signed attestation page naming the assessor, the scope, and the frameworks applied.
How we deliver
AI is only as good as the risk officer who signs it.
Our AI does the operational work of an assessment at a speed no human team matches. A credentialed risk officer makes every judgment call and signs every conclusion. The speed is the AI. The accountability is the human. You need both.
AI does the operational work.
A network of AI agents gathers evidence, inventories every AI system, cross-references the regulations, and drafts the findings.
Rules-based engines make it defensible.
Risk classification runs on deterministic engines, not AI — the same inputs always produce the same result, reproducible years later, which is what a regulator requires.
A human makes the call and signs.
The judgment and the signature are always a named, credentialed risk officer.
That's what lets one officer carry twenty clients' worth of judgment — and it's why every assessment is both AI-native and personally signed.
The market
You shouldn't have to choose.
Speed, judgment, accountability, and a price the mid-market can actually pay. Everyone else asks you to give up one.
✕
Governance software + AI
Documents faster, but the judgment and the accountability still fall back on your team. No one signs.
✕
Consultancies + AI
Real judgment, but capped by billable hours — slow, and priced out of reach for the mid-market.
✕
Other AI-native entrants
Speed, but AI-generated governance without a credentialed risk officer to sign is just faster documentation.
✓
Firemark
AI-native speed, a credentialed second-line risk officer's judgment, a signature that holds up, at a fixed price. The only one with all four.
Why now
Your buyers stopped asking whether you use AI. They're asking who signed off.
Enterprise procurement, boards, and regulators have all started demanding documented evidence of AI oversight at the same time — and most companies have nothing to hand them.
<20%
of companies have AI embedded in core operations with documented governance.
4 weeks
from kickoff to a signed assessment you can hand a regulator or a buyer.
1 name
on the attestation page. Accountability is not distributed across a team.
The sole-practitioner question
One signature is the point — here's why it holds.
Procurement teams reasonably ask what happens when the firm is one senior practitioner. The answer is credentials, method, and documentation that would survive review at any second-line risk function.
Credentials that map to the work
AIGP (IAPP Artificial Intelligence Governance Professional) and CIPP/US, plus sixteen years in second-line risk — the function that reviews, challenges, and signs off on someone else's first-line decisions.
A versioned, repeatable methodology
Every assessment records the framework versions applied, the evidence set reviewed, the classification rationale, and the date of review. Reproducible by a third party, which is what makes it defensible.
Independence is structural
We do not build the AI we assess. Enablement work is a separate track for a different, earlier-stage client — never a governance client whose systems we sign off on.
Documentation built for examination
Deliverables are formatted for the audiences that actually read them: audit committees, regulators, and enterprise security reviewers — not for a slide deck.
Next step
Find out what your AI exposure actually looks like.
A Governance Teardown is a fixed-fee, four-week assessment ending in a signed, audit-ready report. Start with a 30-minute call and we'll tell you honestly whether it fits.