Skip to content

Free template · Word download · Writing guide

AI Vendor Security Addendum Template

Free contract clauses to attach to any agreement with an AI supplier, to copy or download as a Word document, no sign-up. They cover training on your data, what an AI agent may do on your systems, incident notice, model changes and exit. Below them, a guide to every section: what it has to say, real wording for the 4 clauses people get wrong, and what an ISO 27001 auditor asks about AI suppliers. When you would rather not fill it in, PolicyMint writes this schedule for your business and checks it before you see it.

Last updated

Rather not fill it in yourself? Have this one document generated in your branding instead - the signup credits cover the first one. Card required to download that one; no charge today.

The cover page of a generated AI supplier security schedule, branded for an example company, showing its document control block, approval table and the ISO controls it maps to.
Generated from this page's structure, in an example company's branding

Free template

Free AI vendor security addendum and contract clauses

The complete AI vendor security addendum, free to copy from this page or download as an editable Word document. No sign-up. Replace every [bracketed placeholder] with your own details, delete anything that does not apply, and have it approved before you rely on it. The guide below explains what each section has to contain and what an auditor checks.

Free template, full text Download Word (.docx)

AI Vendor Security Addendum - Template

Security terms to attach to a contract with a supplier of AI services or AI agents. Replace the bracketed placeholders with your own details.

This addendum forms part of the agreement between [Organization] and the supplier named in that agreement ("the supplier"). It sets the security terms the supplier agrees to when it provides AI services to [Organization]: AI models and APIs that [Organization] sends data to, AI agents that take actions on [Organization]'s systems or data, and AI features built into software [Organization] uses.

1. Purpose and application

This addendum applies to the AI services listed in the agreement and to any AI service the supplier later provides to [Organization]. Where it conflicts with the main agreement on a security matter, the stricter term applies. Nothing in it reduces an obligation the supplier already owes under the main agreement or at law.

Some large AI providers offer only their standard terms. Where that is the case, [Organization] checks those terms against this addendum before the service is used, records any gap, and [approver role] decides whether to accept it.

2. Definitions

TermMeaning
AI serviceAny product the supplier provides that uses an AI model: a model or its API, an AI agent, or AI features built into software.
AI agentSoftware that takes actions on [Organization]'s systems or data on its own, without a person approving each step.
Customer DataAny information [Organization] sends to, stores in or receives from the AI service, including prompts, uploaded files, outputs and logs.
Model trainingUsing data to build, train, fine-tune or otherwise improve an AI model.
Sub-processorAny third party the supplier uses to deliver the AI service that can access Customer Data, including a third-party model provider.
Security incidentAny event that harms, or is reasonably likely to harm, the confidentiality, integrity or availability of Customer Data, including an AI agent acting outside its agreed scope.

3. Use of Customer Data

The supplier must:

  • Use Customer Data only to provide the AI service to [Organization]
  • Not use Customer Data to train, fine-tune, test or improve any model, its own or a third party's, without [Organization]'s prior written agreement
  • Not keep prompts and outputs longer than [30 days] after processing, unless [Organization] agrees otherwise in writing or the law requires it
  • Process and store Customer Data only in [the agreed countries or regions], and not move it elsewhere without [Organization]'s written agreement
  • Keep Customer Data logically separate from its other customers' data

4. AI agents and automated access

Where the supplier operates an AI agent on [Organization]'s systems or data, the agent may reach only the systems, data and actions agreed in writing with [role]. The supplier gives each agent its own credentials, scoped to that agreed task and never shared or reused. The agent must not make a payment, delete data, change anyone's access or send anything outside [Organization] without recorded approval from a named person at [Organization].

The supplier protects each agent against prompt injection: text inside a ticket, email, document or other content the agent reads is never treated as an instruction that changes its permissions or approved actions. [Organization] can suspend any agent immediately, without the supplier's help.

5. Security requirements

  • Customer Data is encrypted in transit (TLS 1.2 or higher) and at rest (AES-256 or equivalent)
  • Multi-factor authentication for every supplier staff member and administrator account with access to Customer Data
  • Least-privilege access to Customer Data, reviewed [quarterly]
  • Critical vulnerabilities on internet-facing systems fixed within [48 hours] of a fix being available, and others within [30 days]
  • Security testing before release and after material change, including testing for prompt injection and data leaking through outputs
  • A current independent assurance report or certification covering the AI service, such as ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001 or SOC 2

6. Incident notification

The supplier notifies [role] at [channel] of each event below, within the time shown. It cooperates with [Organization]'s own legal notification duties, such as a data breach assessment, and does not notify [Organization]'s customers or any regulator on its behalf without written agreement.

EventNotify withinThe notice says
A security incident affecting Customer Data[24 hours] of becoming awareWhat happened, the data and systems affected, containment so far, and a named contact
An AI agent acting outside its agreed access or scope[24 hours] of becoming awareWhich agent, what it accessed or did, when, and how it was stopped
Ransomware or extortion affecting the service[24 hours] of becoming awareWhat is affected or at risk, current status, and recovery steps
A follow-up report on any of the above[5 business days] after the first noticeRoot cause, the full scope of Customer Data affected, remediation and prevention

7. Logging and records

The supplier logs every access to Customer Data, every administrative action on the systems that hold it, and every action an AI agent takes, including the instruction that triggered it, the data it read and anything it changed.

Logs are protected from alteration and deletion, kept for at least [12 months], and provided to [role] within [5 business days] of a written request, or within [24 hours] during a security incident.

8. Model and service changes

The supplier gives [Organization] at least [30 days] written notice before a material change: replacing the underlying model or changing it in a way that affects how it behaves or what data it uses, changing where Customer Data is processed or stored, adding or replacing a sub-processor, or reducing a security control in this addendum.

[Organization] may object before the change takes effect. If no acceptable alternative is agreed, [Organization] may end the affected service without penalty. Where a change is forced by law or a security emergency, the supplier tells [role] as soon as it can and explains why notice could not be given.

9. Sub-processors and supply chain

The supplier keeps a current list of its sub-processors, naming any third-party model provider behind the service, and gives it to [Organization] on request. It binds each sub-processor in writing to terms at least as protective as this addendum, including the limits on model training, and remains responsible for their acts and omissions as if they were its own.

10. Assurance and audit

The supplier completes [Organization]'s security questionnaire [annually], provides its current certifications or independent assurance reports on request, and tells [role] if one lapses or is withdrawn.

Where no current report covers the service, [Organization] or its auditor may audit the controls relevant to this addendum at an agreed time, no more than once a year unless an incident justifies another. [role] reviews this evidence [annually] and records the outcome.

11. Termination and exit

On termination, or within [30 days] of a written request, the supplier returns Customer Data in a usable, machine-readable format and then deletes it everywhere it is held: prompts, outputs and logs, copies held by sub-processors, and any fine-tuned model, embedding or index built from it. Where a law requires it to keep a copy, it tells [Organization] what it keeps, why and for how long.

The supplier confirms the deletion in writing, revokes every credential, API key and token it holds to [Organization]'s systems, and stops all AI agent access.

This template is a starting point, not legal advice. Replace every bracketed placeholder, delete what does not apply, and have it reviewed before you rely on it.

The guide

How to write an AI vendor security addendum

11
sections
4
with real wording
6
auditor requests
4
failure modes
a day
to write it yourself

An AI vendor security addendum is a schedule of security terms you attach to a contract with a supplier of AI services: AI models and APIs, AI agents that act on your systems, and AI features inside software you use. It sets how the supplier may use your data, what its agents may do, when it must tell you about incidents and changes, and what happens to your data when the contract ends.

Write it in this order - all 11 sections, written as obligations the supplier agrees to - and keep every figure one a reputable supplier can accept and evidence. The 4 clauses that fail most often carry real wording, and why it holds up.

  1. Purpose and application

    What it must contain

    That the addendum forms part of the agreement, which AI services it covers (models and APIs, agents, AI features inside software you already use), and that the stricter term wins where it conflicts with the main agreement on security.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    Whether it is honest about the providers that will not sign. The large model providers offer their standard terms and nothing else, so an addendum that assumes every supplier signs leaves the biggest ones with no record at all.

    Wording that works
    Some large AI providers offer only their standard terms. Where that is the case, [Organization] checks those terms against this addendum before the service is used, records any gap, and [approver role] decides whether to accept it.

    It turns "they would never sign it" from a reason to skip the work into a recorded check with a named approver, which is evidence an auditor can read.

  2. Definitions

    What it must contain

    Only the terms the addendum uses: AI service, AI agent, Customer Data (including prompts, files, outputs and logs), model training, sub-processor and security incident.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    That Customer Data includes prompts and outputs, not just the files you upload, and that a security incident includes an agent acting outside its agreed scope. Those two definitions carry half the addendum.

  3. Use of Customer Data

    What it must contain

    Customer Data is used only to provide the service, never to train, fine-tune or improve a model without written agreement, kept no longer than a stated period, processed only in agreed locations, and kept apart from other customers' data.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    The training clause, read against the supplier's own terms. Wording that lets a supplier use data to "improve our services" can include training, so the addendum has to name training and fine-tuning explicitly.

  4. AI agents and automated access

    What it must contain

    What an agent may reach and do, agreed in writing; its own scoped credentials; human approval before high-impact actions; protection against prompt injection; and a way for you to stop it immediately.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    This is the clause generic AI addendums leave out, because they were written for chatbots that answer questions, not agents that act. An agent running under someone's personal admin account fails it on the first question.

    Wording that works
    Where the supplier operates an AI agent on [Organization]'s systems or data, the agent may reach only the systems, data and actions agreed in writing with [role]. The supplier gives each agent its own credentials, scoped to that agreed task and never shared or reused. The agent must not make a payment, delete data, change anyone's access or send anything outside [Organization] without recorded approval from a named person at [Organization].

    It names the four actions that do real damage and puts a person in front of each of them, without banning the agent from the routine work it was bought for.

  5. Security requirements

    What it must contain

    Encryption in transit and at rest, multi-factor authentication and least privilege for the supplier's staff, patch deadlines, security testing that includes prompt injection and data leaking through outputs, and a current independent assurance report.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    That the terms are ones a reputable supplier can accept and evidence. A requirement no AI supplier can meet gets struck out in negotiation, and the rest of the addendum loses credibility with it.

  6. Incident notification

    What it must contain

    A table of events with a deadline for each: a security incident, an agent acting out of scope, ransomware or extortion, and the follow-up report. What each notice says, and who receives it.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    That the clock starts when the supplier becomes aware, not when it confirms, and that your own legal notice duties are protected. If the supplier tells your customers or a regulator first, you have lost control of the response.

  7. Logging and records

    What it must contain

    Logs of access to Customer Data, administrative actions and every action an agent takes, protected from alteration, kept for a stated period, and handed over on request, faster during an incident.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    Agent actions specifically, with the instruction that triggered each one. Without that, nobody can say afterwards whether an agent was misused or simply did what it was told.

  8. Model and service changes

    What it must contain

    Notice before the supplier swaps the model, changes where data is processed, adds a sub-processor or weakens a control, and your right to object and leave without penalty.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    Whether a model change counts as a change at all. Suppliers replace the model behind a product routinely, and a new model can mean a new provider and a new country for your data.

    Wording that works
    The supplier gives [Organization] at least [30 days] written notice before a material change: replacing the underlying model or changing it in a way that affects how it behaves or what data it uses, changing where Customer Data is processed or stored, adding or replacing a sub-processor, or reducing a security control in this addendum.

    It defines a material change by its effect on your data rather than by the supplier's release notes, so a quiet model swap is caught.

  9. Sub-processors and supply chain

    What it must contain

    A current sub-processor list that names any third-party model provider, the same terms flowing down to each, and the supplier staying responsible for them.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    The model provider. Many AI products are a layer over someone else's model, and that provider is a sub-processor holding your prompts even when the supplier's marketing never mentions it.

  10. Assurance and audit

    What it must contain

    An annual questionnaire, current certifications or assurance reports on request, notice if one lapses, and an audit right only where no current report covers the service.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    That the audit right is realistic. Suppliers resist open-ended audits, but accept one where no independent report exists; asking for the report first is what gets the clause signed.

  11. Termination and exit

    What it must contain

    Data returned in a usable format, then deleted everywhere, including copies at sub-processors and anything built from it, with written confirmation and every credential revoked.

    What the supplier and your auditor look for

    Whether deletion covers what was built from your data, not just the data. A fine-tuned model or a search index of your documents outlives the contract unless the exit clause names it.

    Wording that works
    On termination, or within [30 days] of a written request, the supplier returns Customer Data in a usable, machine-readable format and then deletes it everywhere it is held: prompts, outputs and logs, copies held by sub-processors, and any fine-tuned model, embedding or index built from it. Where a law requires it to keep a copy, it tells [Organization] what it keeps, why and for how long.

    It lists the AI-specific places your data survives (embeddings, indexes, fine-tuned models, a model provider's logs) so "we deleted your account" is not mistaken for deleting your data.

This addendum governs the supplier. What your own staff may put into an AI tool belongs in an AI acceptable use policy, and how you choose, approve and leave cloud services generally belongs in the cloud security policy.

Get it written for your organization - your first document is free Card required; no charge today.

At audit

What an auditor asks about AI suppliers

Nobody is asked whether they trust their AI supplier. You are asked for the terms you agreed, what its agents can do, and when you last checked. These 6 requests cover most of what an auditor asks about AI suppliers.

Which of your suppliers provide AI services, and what security terms did you agree with each?

Satisfies A list of AI suppliers, including AI features switched on inside software you already use, each with signed terms or a recorded check of its standard terms.

Fails A supplier register that leaves out the AI assistant someone enabled in the email system last quarter.

Show me the agreed security terms for one AI supplier.

Satisfies A signed addendum, or the provider's standard terms checked against your requirements, with the gaps and who accepted them.

Fails "They are a big company, so we assumed it was fine," with nothing written down.

Can this supplier use your data to train its models?

Satisfies A clause or a checked term that answers no, or yes with written agreement, and where to find it.

Fails An answer from memory of the supplier's blog post.

What can this AI agent do on your systems, and who approved that?

Satisfies A written scope, credentials issued to the agent alone, a record of approvals for high-impact actions, and how you would stop it.

Fails An agent running under an administrator's personal account with no record of what it did.

How would you know if this supplier changed its model or added a sub-processor?

Satisfies A notice clause, or a named person subscribed to the provider's change notices who checks them against your terms.

Fails You found out from the news.

When did you last review this supplier's assurance?

Satisfies A dated review of a current certificate or independent report, and what was done about any gaps.

Fails A SOC 2 report that expired two years ago, still in the procurement folder.

Failure modes

Where AI vendor contracts go wrong

Most of these come from contract terms written for software that answered questions, used for software that now takes actions.

  • Relying on "we never train on your data" from a web page

    Marketing pages change and do not bind anyone. The promise belongs in the contract, or in the terms you checked and recorded, and it has to cover fine-tuning and "improving the service" as well as training. Check which plan you are on: business and API plans often commit to it, free and consumer plans often do not.

  • Treating an AI agent like a chatbot

    A chatbot answers; an agent acts. Once software can update records, send email or move money, the contract has to limit what it may do, give it its own credentials, put a person in front of the risky actions and give you a way to stop it. Most AI addendums were written before agents existed and say none of this.

  • No notice when the model changes

    The product name stays the same while the model behind it, the provider running it and the country holding your prompts all change. Without a notice clause that treats a model swap as a material change, the first you hear of it is a security review you did not get to do.

  • An exit clause that forgets what was built from your data

    Deleting the account does not delete the embeddings, the search index of your documents, the fine-tuned model or the model provider's logs. Name them, require written confirmation, and revoke every credential the supplier's agents still hold.

From template to audit-ready

Where AI supplier terms fit in ISO 27001

ISO 27001 treats an AI supplier like any other supplier, which is exactly why the terms have to be specific. Control A.5.20, addressing information security within supplier agreements, expects security requirements to be set and agreed with each supplier according to the kind of relationship, and a supplier that holds your prompts or runs agents on your systems is a relationship with risks a standard IT contract never considered. The sub-processor clause supports A.5.21, managing security in the ICT supply chain, because a model provider behind the product is part of that chain. And the change clause is where A.5.22, monitoring, review and change management of supplier services, becomes visible to an auditor. ControlStack has a plain-English breakdown of security clauses in supplier agreements if you want the control on its own terms.

If you are working toward ISO 42001 as well, the same schedule supports its expectation that AI suppliers fit your approach to responsible AI. One schedule is still one document, though: certification needs the whole consistent set. See what a certifiable ISO 27001 documentation set contains.

See the real output

What PolicyMint generates

Same structure as the guide, written for your suppliers: each AI service named with the data it handles, the agent clause written for what your agents can actually touch, notices routed to your security contact, and every deadline marked for you to confirm. It carries your branding and exports to Word, PDF or Excel. The cover in the hero and the body page below are that output, generated for an example company.

A body page of a generated AI supplier security schedule, showing numbered clauses written for a specific business with the placeholders resolved.
One page of the generated document, for an example company. The trial produces the whole document, not a sample.

Where the guide says [role] or [system], the document says yours; where PolicyMint cannot know a fact, it asks rather than guesses.

The PolicyMint guided review: a generated scope statement with one highlighted sentence that needs the reader's input, and beside it a review panel explaining what is needed, a field to answer it, and the choice between having the answer written in or inserted exactly as typed.

The one fact this document could not know stays highlighted in the document and the export. The review explains what is needed and writes your answer in. Nothing is invented. Fictional demo data.

Side by side

Writing it yourself vs generating it

Both routes end with the same 11 sections. What differs is how many of the decisions inside them you make alone, and who checks the result before a supplier's lawyers or an auditor do.

Scroll the table sideways to compare both routes.

Dimension Writing it yourself Generating it with PolicyMint
Getting the structure This page. Eleven sections, roughly a day once you know your AI suppliers and what their agents do. The same eleven sections, filled in from your business profile and your answers about each AI supplier.
The agent clause The part generic addendums leave out. You decide the scope, the approvals and the stop switch. Written for the agents you actually use and what they can touch, with high-impact actions behind a named approver.
Deadlines and periods You pick every notice period and retention figure, and hope they are ones a supplier will sign. Realistic defaults, each one marked for you to confirm rather than silently assumed.
Checking it Nobody, until the supplier's lawyers or an auditor. Both are expensive places to find out. Three independent verifiers before you see it, against what ISO 27001 expects of supplier agreements.
Making it look like yours Your own formatting, headers and approval block. Your logo and colors, exported to Word, PDF or Excel.
The rest of the set Your supplier security policy, cloud policy and AI policy are each another day, and they have to agree. The whole set stays consistent by construction. Your first document is free.
ISO 27001 documents

36

ISO 27001 documents

tiered by what you actually need

ISO 42001 documents

21

ISO 42001 documents

for AI management systems

Clauses and controls mapped

182

Clauses and controls mapped

every document cites the ones it satisfies

Verifiers per section

3

Verifiers per section

on a different model to the writer

AI vendor addendum FAQ

The questions people ask

Including what to do when a provider will not sign, and how to stop a vendor training on your data.

What is an AI vendor security addendum?

An AI vendor security addendum is a schedule of security terms you attach to a contract with a supplier of AI services: AI models and APIs, AI agents that act on your systems, and AI features inside software you use. It sets how the supplier may use your data, what its agents may do, when it must tell you about incidents and changes, and what happens to your data when the contract ends. Australian contracts usually attach terms like these as a schedule, so you may see it called an AI supplier security schedule.

What clauses should an AI vendor contract include?

At minimum: a limit on using your data, prompts and outputs to train or improve models; a retention period and agreed data locations; limits on what any AI agent may access and do, with human approval for high-impact actions; baseline security controls; incident notice deadlines, including for an agent acting out of scope; logging; notice before the model or a sub-processor changes; a sub-processor list naming any third-party model provider; assurance and audit; and deletion of your data, and anything built from it, at exit.

How do I stop an AI vendor training on my data?

Put it in the contract, and name fine-tuning and "improving the service" as well as training, because that wording can include training. Many business and API plans already commit not to train on customer data, while free and consumer plans often do not, so check which plan you are on. Where the provider only offers its standard terms, record which term gives you the commitment and keep a copy, since published terms change.

What if the AI provider will not sign our addendum?

That is normal for the large model providers. Check their standard terms against the addendum before you use the service, record each gap, and have a named approver decide whether to accept it. That record is what an ISO 27001 auditor looks for when a supplier would not negotiate. Smaller and specialist AI suppliers will usually sign, or mark up, an addendum like this one.

Is this the same as a data processing agreement?

No. A data processing agreement deals with personal information under privacy law. This addendum covers the security of all the data you give an AI service, personal or not, and what its agents may do on your systems. Where the AI service handles personal information you may need both. In Australia, the OAIC's guidance on commercially available AI products recommends due diligence before you use one.

Does ISO 27001 require security terms with AI suppliers?

Yes, in the same way it does for any supplier. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 expects security requirements to be set and agreed with each supplier according to the kind of relationship, and an AI supplier that holds your prompts or runs agents on your systems is a relationship with specific risks. The auditor will look for the agreed terms, or your recorded check of a provider's standard terms. ISO/IEC 42001 adds the expectation that AI suppliers fit your approach to responsible AI.

How is this different from the Australian Government's AI model clauses?

The Digital Transformation Agency publishes AI model clauses for Australian Government agencies buying AI systems and services, and they cover wider procurement matters. This addendum is narrower and written for businesses: the security terms you attach to any contract with an AI supplier, including the agents it runs on your systems.

Is this AI vendor security addendum template free to download?

Yes. The complete template is on this page and as an editable Word document, with no sign-up and no card. Replace the bracketed placeholders, delete what does not apply, and have it reviewed before you rely on it. If you would rather have it written for your organization, with your AI suppliers and agents named, PolicyMint generates it and your first document is free; we ask for a card only when you download that one, and it is not charged.

How much does a full ISO 27001 document set cost?

PolicyMint's Full ISMS / AIMS pack is a one-time A$350US$229£179€209 including GST and covers a complete certifiable ISO 27001 set of 36 finished documents, or a complete ISO 42001 set of 21. Each document is drafted from your own business profile, checked by three independent verifiers before you see it, and exported in your branding as Word, PDF and Excel. There is no subscription and credits are valid for 18 months. That is about A$8.75US$5.73£4.48€5.23 per finished document. For comparison, Advisera publicly lists about A$1,300 (US$897)US$897about £660 (US$897)about €780 (US$897) one-time for pre-written templates you complete with its AI copilot, and GRC Solutions (formerly IT Governance) about A$950 (£495)about US$670 (£495)£495about €580 (£495) excl. VAT. Certification itself is a separate cost, paid to an auditor and a certification body.

Ready when you are

Stop staring at an empty document set

Set up your business once. Get the documents you actually need, written for how you really operate, in your branding, checked before you see them.

Your first document is on us. We ask for a card when you download it and you are not charged for it, and there is no sales call.