Whitepaper · 18 pages · Q1 2026FILE NO. 015 / ART. 15
The technical gap
in Article 15
compliance.
Why EU AI Act Article 15 requires specialised robustness and cybersecurity testing beyond governance consulting — and what independent technical testing actually covers.
Inside the document
What the whitepaper covers.
- Why Article 15 requires specialized technical testing
- How independent robustness and cybersecurity testing is performed
- Mapping attack categories (prompt injection, data poisoning, model theft) to Article 15 clauses
- Sample finding structure and evidence requirements
- How to evaluate technical testing partners
- Checklist: components regulators expect in Article 15 reports
PDF · 18 pages · For decision makers
01 / AudienceWho reads this
Written for the four people on the Article 15 call.
Plain language, technical depth where it matters. Designed to be forwarded inside your organisation without a translator.
01
US companies expanding into Europe
Teams preparing for Article 15 conformity ahead of the 2026–2027 enforcement window.
02
EMEA enterprises
Compliance teams readying high-risk AI portfolios for EU AI Act filing.
03
Compliance consultants
Advisors scoping engagements for clients facing Article 15 obligations.
04
CISOs, CTOs & Legal counsel
The people accountable for AI risk reporting inside the organisation.
02 / TopicsWhat's inside
Six conversations it settles.
01EU AI Act Article 15 requirements explained
02Compliance checklist for US companies entering EMEA
03Prompt injection testing mapped to Article 15 cybersecurity
04Independent AI security audit vs. governance consulting
05Partner evaluation questions for compliance consultants
06EU AI Act enforcement timeline and penalties
● Need compliance now?
Ready to file,
not read?
The whitepaper is for context. If you need Article 15 evidence on your desk, an independent audit is the next call.