← Trust Directory

Reflection AI

reflection.ai · 1 assessment

Reflection AI - organisation
AI assurance review required
Assurance score 48/100 is below 55: review before approving
Assessed Oct 21, 2026 · public evidence coverage 50% · evidence confidence medium · methodology 0.7.1

Certifications

What the vendor claims, and how far each claim has been independently corroborated. A claim is only ever as strong as the rung it reaches.

ISO/IEC 42001
Not claimed

Not claimed in any public source scanned. This is the AI-management-system certification — in its absence, the vendor’s AI governance rests on its general security and privacy certifications.

  • — Vendor claimed
  • — Evidence cited
  • — Registry corroborated
  • — Scope verified
  • — Current

Supply chain

Third parties this vendor’s AI depends on, as disclosed in its own public material. Responsibility transfers; accountability doesn’t.

Models: Beam (501B MoE, open weights)
Infrastructure: Together AI (inference, Canada), Voltage Park, Inc. (inference, United States), Tailscale (inference routing, United States), Google Cloud Platform (cloud infrastructure, United States), Cloudflare, Ltd. (CDN / web hosting)
Subprocessors: WorkOS, Inc. (identity management), Intercom (customer service), Stripe (payment processing), Dow Jones (export and sanctions compliance), DataGrail (data subject rights requests), Cinder Technologies, Inc. (content moderation), Bird B.V. (customer service; US, BE, IE, IN, NL, UK)

How to read this

This assessment is automated and point-in-time, built only from evidence the vendor publishes publicly plus checks against official certification registries. It is not an audit, not a certification, and not an endorsement. A low score means public evidence was thin or uncorroborated - which is a finding about disclosure, not proof of a weak control environment. Where too little was found to characterise a product at all, no score or grade is published rather than a low one: absence of evidence is not a number, and a letter grade would read as a verdict on the vendor when it would only be a verdict on what we could collect. This record reflects the evidence available on Oct 21, 2026.