google.com
Automated, point-in-time. Not independently reviewed or approved by TRUSTYCYBER unless expressly stated.
- No clear commitment that your data will not train their models
- Underlying model providers not named
- Processing location not disclosed
See Before you sign, with what to ask for ↓
Scanned Aug 28, 2026 · Public evidence · Point-in-time
Higher scores indicate stronger, independently supported AI assurance — governance, AI systems, models, data, supply chain and third-party assurance evidence. The score and the decision are related but different: a well-scored vendor can still carry conditions.
Before you sign
Why it matters: The public sources scanned do not clearly state that customer prompts, files, and outputs are excluded from training or fine-tuning of first- or third-party models.
What to ask for: Get a no-training clause covering first- and third-party models into the DPA/order form.
Why it matters: AI is used but the public sources scanned do not name which foundation models or providers sit in the request path.
What to ask for: Require named providers and model versions, plus notice before any model change.
Why it matters: The public sources scanned do not state where customer data is processed or offer a residency option.
What to ask for: Pin processing regions per data classification in the contract.
Buyer questionsanswered only from the public evidence scanned — click a row for the answer
!Will they train on your data?Ask the vendor
Not found in the public sources scanned — ask the vendor directly.
✓How long do they keep your data?Clear
The Cloud DPA instructs deletion of all remaining Customer Data from Google systems at term end, subject to a deferred-deletion provision.
“delete all remaining Customer Data (including existing copies) from Google’s systems”
“auto-delete your data, we give you the tools to do it.”
!Who else can access your data?Ask the vendor
Google publishes a subprocessor register showing each entity, its activity, and service or region relevance.
Requires written confirmation — see Before you sign ↓
“Google and its affiliates engage the third-party entities in the table below to perform limited activities in connection with the Google Cloud Platform Services.”
“Data Labeling: Human labelers apply labels to datasets submitted by Customer based on instructions provided by Customer. See the Data Labeling Use Cases page for more information.”
!Where is your data processed?Ask the vendor
Not found in the public sources scanned — ask the vendor directly.
!What happens in a security incident?Ask the vendor
The DPA defines a Data Incident as a breach of Google security leading to destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorised disclosure or access on Google-managed systems.
Confirm in writing: Ask the vendor to state this in writing before signing.
“means a breach of Google’s security leading to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorized disclosure of, or access to, Customer Data on systems managed by or otherwise controlled by Google.”
Key findingsclick a row for the evidence
!Human data-labeling is a disclosed subprocessor activityGap
The register discloses human labelers applying labels to customer-submitted datasets under customer instructions, across named countries.
Datasets sent for labeling are seen by people; which entities and countries apply to a given workload needs confirming.
Question for vendor: Which labeling entities and locations would apply to your data, and how is labeling scoped or excluded?
“Data Labeling: Human labelers apply labels to datasets submitted by Customer based on instructions provided by Customer. See the Data Labeling Use Cases page for more information.”
✓AI governance artefacts are published and datedStrong
AI Principles, annual AI Progress reports since 2019, SAIF, and an AI/ML Privacy Commitment.
Longitudinal, versioned governance beats point-in-time statements.
“Our approach to developing and harnessing the potential of AI is grounded in our founding mission — to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. We believe our approach to AI must be both bold and responsible.”
“See past AI Progress reports 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019”
“Secure AI Framework (SAIF) is designed to address top-of-mind concerns for security professionals, like AI/ML model risk management, security, and privacy—helping”
?Technical dependency observed: GoogleObservation
Technical evidence (DNS, certificate, or HTTP) shows a dependency on Google as a service provider. This dependency is not identified in the vendor's published materials.
An undisclosed provider dependency is exactly the gap independent verification exists to surface.
Question for vendor: Verification required — Google appears to be involved as a service provider: confirm whether this dependency exists, and whether it processes customer data.
“Google and its affiliates engage the third-party entities in the table below to perform limited activities in connection with the Google Cloud Platform Services.”
“Data Labeling: Human labelers apply labels to datasets submitted by Customer based on instructions provided by Customer. See the Data Labeling Use Cases page for more information.”
?Technical dependency observed: MicrosoftObservation
Technical evidence (DNS, certificate, or HTTP) shows a dependency on Microsoft as a service provider. This dependency is not identified in the vendor's published materials.
An undisclosed provider dependency is exactly the gap independent verification exists to surface.
Question for vendor: Verification required — Microsoft appears to be involved as a service provider: confirm whether this dependency exists, and whether it processes customer data.
“Google and its affiliates engage the third-party entities in the table below to perform limited activities in connection with the Google Cloud Platform Services.”
“Data Labeling: Human labelers apply labels to datasets submitted by Customer based on instructions provided by Customer. See the Data Labeling Use Cases page for more information.”
Assurance dimensionsweighted components of one score — not eight separate ratings
Organisation & AI governance15% of the score72
Who owns AI risk — policies, responsible-AI principles, human oversight and administrative controls.
Assessed against ISO 42001 · NIST AI RMF · AIUC-1
“Our approach to developing and harnessing the potential of AI is grounded in our founding mission — to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. We believe our approach to AI must be both bold and responsible.”
“See past AI Progress reports 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019”
Governance & accountability: the certifications above are independently corroborated, but they cover the management system — these specific disclosures are the vendor's own statements, not yet independently verified.
AI system15% of the score27
What AI the vendor actually runs and where it sits in the product — the map everything else is judged against.
Assessed against ISO 42001 · NIST AI RMF
“Google Unified Security is a context-aware security solution designed to deliver integrated, intelligence-driven, and AI-infused security workflows through Gemini.”
How AI features are evaluated before and after release — evals, red-teaming, monitoring.
Assessed against NIST GenAI · NIST AI RMF · ISO 42001
“Secure AI Framework (SAIF) is designed to address top-of-mind concerns for security professionals, like AI/ML model risk management, security, and privacy—helping”
“red teaming against generative AI models and applications, and integrate AI into your operations to reduce manual toil and build advanced threat detections.”
How changes to models and AI features are controlled and communicated — versioning, notice, rollback.
Assessed against ISO 27001 · ISO 42001
Change management: not publicly evidenced.
Model10% of the score0
Which model providers and versions process customer data, and how changes to them are disclosed.
Assessed against NIST GenAI · ISO 42001
Model provider transparency: not publicly evidenced.
Customer data15% of the score65
Whether customer data trains models, how long it is retained, where it is processed, and how it is protected.
Assessed against ISO 27018 · OAIC APPs · EU AI Act
“delete all remaining Customer Data (including existing copies) from Google’s systems”
“auto-delete your data, we give you the tools to do it.”
AI supply chain10% of the score60
The named chain of AI and infrastructure providers behind the product, and how it is disclosed.
Assessed against ISO 27001 · ISO 27017
“Google and its affiliates engage the third-party entities in the table below to perform limited activities in connection with the Google Cloud Platform Services.”
“Data Labeling: Human labelers apply labels to datasets submitted by Customer based on instructions provided by Customer. See the Data Labeling Use Cases page for more information.”
Subprocessors & supply chain: vendor-evidenced, not yet independently corroborated.
Security foundation15% of the score65
How security problems are found, reported and handled — disclosure channels, bug bounty, incident response.
Assessed against ISO 27001 · NIST AI RMF
“means a breach of Google’s security leading to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorized disclosure of, or access to, Customer Data on systems managed by or otherwise controlled by Google.”
Independent assurance evidence10% of the score78
Whether claimed certifications and attestations are independently corroborated — checked against official registries and issuing bodies. Which certifications, and what each one does and does not establish, is stated per certificate.
Assessed against ISO 17021-1 · ISO 42006 · ISO 27006-1 · ISO 27008
“ISO/IEC 27001 | ISO/IEC 27017 | ISO/IEC 27018 | ISO/IEC 27701 | ISO/IEC 42001 | PCI 3DS Core Security Standard | PCI DSS | PCI PIN Security | SOC 1 | SOC 2 | SOC 3”
“IRAP (Information Security Registered Assessors Program)”
Read from the registry record above — cited, not reproduced.
Read from the registry record above — cited, not reproduced.
Read from the registry record above — cited, not reproduced.
Read from the registry record above — cited, not reproduced.
Read from the registry record above — cited, not reproduced.
Read from the registry record above — cited, not reproduced.
Legal & contractual10% of the score60
The contractual backbone a buyer can rely on — terms, DPAs, privacy commitments and regulatory posture.
Assessed against EU AI Act · OAIC APPs
“delete all remaining Customer Data (including existing copies) from Google’s systems”
“Customer is a controller or processor, as applicable, of Customer Personal”
Legal & contractual transparency: vendor-evidenced, not yet independently corroborated.
Not graded: Agent — not applicable to this scan.
What would strengthen assuranceeach figure is from today's score — resolving one changes the others
Resolving an evidence gap strengthens the dimension it belongs to, and with it the score: 54 → up to 80 with every identified gap resolved.
AI supply chainclick a node to focus it · drag to pan · zoom with the controls
What you inheritTrustyCyber's AI Shared Responsibility Matrix v1.0
This scan names the vendor’s AI supply chain without assessing the responsibility split — that depends on how you consume the product. Under the common managed models, a deployer inherits 16 of the matrix’s 41 responsibilities from providers, each with named evidence owed.
Map your inherited responsibilitiesAssurance evidence: certifications 10 — registry checks and verification ladders, click to view
Listed in the Google Cloud compliance offerings catalogue.
Checked against IAF CertSearch, Aug 24, 2026: Verified on the registry
Not yet checked against a registry — a verification task is queued with TrustyCyber.
Not yet checked against a registry — a verification task is queued with TrustyCyber.
Not yet checked against a registry — a verification task is queued with TrustyCyber.
Australian government assessment programme, listed for Google Cloud.
Not yet checked against a registry — a verification task is queued with TrustyCyber.
Checked against Data Privacy Framework (dataprivacyframework.gov), Aug 28, 2026: Verified on the registry
Checked against CSA STAR Registry, Aug 28, 2026: Verified on the registry
Scope covers the Looker (original) hosted platform offerings ONLY - not Google organisation-wide. Extends to ISO/IEC 27017:2015 and 27018:2019 control objectives within that scope. Certified by Coalfire Certification, Inc. (ANAB).
Checked against IAF CertSearch, Aug 24, 2026: Verified on the registry
Three certified offerings on the FedRAMP Marketplace: Google Services / GCP (High baseline, JAB, certified since 4 Dec 2019), Google Workspace (since 28 Oct 2021, scope includes Gemini App and Gemini for Workspace), and Gemini for Government (certified 21 Jan 2026, FedRAMP 20x Class B). All in Ongoing Certification phase.
Checked against FedRAMP Marketplace (fedramp.gov), Aug 24, 2026: Verified on the registry
Checked against FedRAMP Marketplace (fedramp.gov), Aug 28, 2026: Verified on the registry
Sources 19 — click to view
Appendix: standards landscape 8 — click to view
Where each standard behind this assessment stands today, from TrustyCyber’s continuously maintained standards radar.
Want to go further?
This scan assesses Google at an organisational level. Assurance can vary significantly between products, models and agents — enter the product you’re evaluating to run a deeper AI System Assurance Scan.
Scan a specific product →This automated result is based on publicly available information at the time of scanning. It is not an audit, certification, legal opinion or assurance engagement. Publicly unavailable evidence may materially change the conclusion.