window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; dataLayer.push({ 'region': 'global' });

Just Launched Gruve PulseAI Platform, your private AI infrastructure, production-ready in under 2 weeks.PulseAI is live — private AI, ready in 2 weeks.

See PulseAI
The Gap

Your plan exists.
Has anyone practiced running it? 

Unreviewed
by design 

Prompt logs and MCP manifests exist, but no one is reviewing them with investigative methodology.

 

Audit trails
you can't trust 

Logging is often incomplete, inconsistently retained, and never checked for tamper-evidence. 

Unverified
supply chain 

Models, plugins, and fine-tuned adapters are deployed with no provenance review. 

The gap is not hypothetical. MITRE ATLAS, OWASP's LLM Top 10, and Palo
Alto Unit 42 all confirm these attack techniques are active in the wild.

Talk to a facilitator 
Solutions

A forensic investigation,
not a scan, not a red team 

Gruve's AI Compromise Assessment applies the same evidence-collection discipline used
in endpoint and network forensics to the AI-specific evidence layer. AI accelerates the
review; every finding is investigator-validated before it reaches you. 

See our solution brief

Prompt log
forensics  

Reviews AI interaction logs for injection attempts, jailbreaks, reconnaissance, and exfiltration indicators. 

MCP manifest &
tool config audit 

Checks every deployed MCP server and plugin for overgranted permissions and signs of tampering. 

AI audit log
assessment 

Tests whether your audit record is complete and tamper-evident enough to support an investigation. 

System prompt &
config forensics

Reviews system prompts and guardrail history for unauthorized changes or governance drift. 

Supply chain
integrity review 

Verifies the provenance of every model, plugin, and fine-tuned adapter in your deployment. 

AI-specific IOC
development 

Turns findings into indicators of compromise your SIEM can act on immediately. 

DISTINCT SERVICE OFFERINGS 

Choose the scope that
fits your organization 

Tier 1

AI Rapid Triage

A fast forensic scan, priority log review, MCP manifest audit, and audit log completeness check. 

  • Findings summary
  • MCP audit report
  • Preliminary IOC set
  • Remediation priority list
Best for: teams needing an initial review or post-incident scoping.
Explore this tier
Most common fit
Tier 2

Full AI Compromise Assessment

A comprehensive investigation across all six forensic evidence categories. 

  • Full forensic report
  • Risk-ranked findings
  • AI-specific IOC catalog
  • Supply chain assessment
  • Executive brief
  • Remediation roadmap
Best for: CISOs needing a complete forensic baseline. 
Explore this tier
Tier 3

AI Security Retainer

Continuous log monitoring, quarterly manifest audits, and ad-hoc AI incident response support. 

  • Monthly threat summary
  • Quarterly audit reports
  • Updated IOC feeds
  • On-call AI IR support
  • Annual full assessment
Best for: organizations with mature AI programs. 
Explore this tier
WHY GRUVE

Investigation discipline, applied to AI 

Built for a real investigation

not another AI security product demo or governance framework. 

AI-native understanding, DFIR discipline

evidence, reproducibility, and clear investigator ownership of every conclusion. 

Covers the full forensic surface

prompt logs, MCP manifests, audit trails, system prompts, and supply chain — in one engagement. 

AI accelerates, never concludes

used only for evidence organization, never as an autonomous source of findings. 

One engagement, every stakeholder

IOCs for security operations, a remediation roadmap for engineering, a defensible record for legal, and a risk-ranked brief for executives. 

Successful Stories

Learn how Gruve drives impact

Financial services firm

Finding what 18 months of AI deployment left behind 

A mid-market financial services firm had rolled out AI tools and MCP-enabled workflows across three business units with no formal security review. An unrelated incident prompted the CISO to ask a harder question: had the AI environment ever been checked at all? 
Key results
  • Found 3 MCP servers with overprivileged, write-capable access 
  • Uncovered 47 days of missing audit history across two logging gaps 
  • Flagged an unverified third-party plugin for immediate remediation 
  • Delivered 14 SIEM-ready IOC signatures and a board-ready brief 
Discuss a similar situation

FAQs

Frequently asked questions about
AI Compromise Assessment

What is an AI Compromise Assessment? 

A forensic investigation of your deployed AI environment — prompt logs, MCP manifests, audit trails, system prompts, and supply chain — to determine whether it has actually been abused, manipulated, or compromised. 

How is this different from AI red teaming or a governance review? 

Red teaming tests whether something could be abused. This investigates whether it already has been. It’s an evidence-based forensic review, not an architecture assessment or policy audit. 

Does AI drive the conclusions in this assessment? 

No. AI is used only to accelerate log clustering and evidence organization. Every forensic finding, severity rating, and IOC is validated by a human investigator. 

What if our AI logging is incomplete? 

That’s a finding in itself. Gruve assesses completeness and retention gaps as part of the engagement, so you know exactly what your evidentiary record can and can’t support. 

Why does this need to happen now? 

AI interaction logs and manifest histories aren’t retained indefinitely. Every month without a forensic baseline is a month of evidence that may become unrecoverable — and regulatory and insurance expectations for AI governance are rising. 

Get Started

Investigate your AI environment before
an incident forces the question. 

See how Gruve's AI Compromise Assessment applies DFIR-grade methodology to the prompt layer,
MCP toolchain, audit trail, and supply chain of your deployed AI environment. 

Download solution brief ↓

    Response within 24 hours · NDA available on request