AcademyResourcesCompanyResearchBook a demo ↗
Solutions / Government

Secure the AI serving the public.

Citizen-service chatbots, benefits and eligibility systems, and agents acting on government data demand the highest bar for safety, security, and accountability. SecuraAI discovers, tests, and governs public-sector AI to meet it.

/ The stakes

In government, AI must be accountable by default.

Agencies are deploying AI into citizen services, benefits adjudication, case management, and internal operations. These systems handle sensitive citizen data and make decisions that affect rights, benefits, and trust in government.

Public-sector AI carries unique obligations: transparency, due process, equity, and security against sophisticated, persistent adversaries. A biased eligibility model, a chatbot that misstates entitlements, or an agent exposed to injection becomes a public-accountability and oversight matter.

Securing government AI means proving — with documented evidence — that systems are safe, equitable, controllable, and resilient against a capable adversary.

/ The threat surface

Where public-sector AI breaks.

The failure modes that matter when AI serves citizens.

Sensitive citizen-data exposure

Agents and RAG over citizen records can be steered into disclosing PII or case data to the wrong party.

Inequitable or wrong determinations

Eligibility and adjudication models that err or perform unevenly create due-process and equity failures.

Prompt injection & manipulation

Citizen-supplied content and documents are attacker-controllable inputs an agent may treat as instructions.

Sophisticated adversaries

Public systems face capable, persistent attackers probing models and agents for footholds.

Over-privileged agents

Agents granted broad, standing access to government systems carry an outsized blast radius.

Shadow & unsanctioned AI

Staff use of unapproved AI tools with sensitive data is a large, low-visibility exposure.

/ Evidence & compliance

Mapped to the rules government answers to.

Findings structured as documented evidence for public-sector frameworks and oversight.

NIST AI RMF
Findings structured for Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage.
NIST 800-53
Control evidence for AI within federal information systems.
FedRAMP-aligned
Security evidence aligned to cloud-authorization expectations.
OMB AI guidance
Documentation for safety- and rights-impacting AI use.
EU AI Act
Aligned to high-risk obligations for public-sector AI.
CISA Secure by Design
Evidence aligned to secure-by-design expectations.
/ Get started

Prove your public-sector AI is safe and accountable.

Start with a free risk assessment. We'll probe a live system and show you exactly where data and decisions are exposed.