Stripe approved for payments
Welcome to
agentic compliance
Legiscope’s AI agents write your register of processings, review your processors, prepare your DPIAs and watch your websites — then file every decision with its evidence, the way a privacy lawyer with fifteen years of practice would.
Your business changes. Your privacy programme catches up automatically.
A new vendor, application, cookie or processing activity starts somewhere in the business. Legiscope detects the change, connects its privacy impact, and prepares every affected record, assessment and decision.
Typeform opened by the team
Analytics script published
AWS added 2 providers
The official DPA and subprocessor notice are retained with the relationship.
- Art. 28contract
- Official DPA kept
- Subprocessorsdeclared
- Current list recorded
- TransferEU → US
- Safeguard linked
Processor assessment and transfer filed together · source kept
Finance started using Stripe. No application record covered it.
- ApplicationAPP-018
- Owner and systems recorded
- ActivityP-021
- Payments linked
- Databilling
- Customer and transaction data
Application and processing activity filed together
How agentic compliance transforms privacy management
Traditional privacy software gives teams forms, databases and task lists. Legiscope’s agents prepare the actual compliance work: they read source material, connect records, identify gaps, draft outputs and bring decisions requiring judgement to the right person.
Your team does the preparation: interviews, spreadsheets, chasing owners, assembling it by hand.
Your team does the deciding: the agent drafts from your own material and hands you the judgement calls.
| Register·Art. 30 | BeforeFive weeks | AfterThree minutes | A sourced draft, every entry traced to the material it came from. |
|---|---|---|---|
| DPIA·Art. 35 | BeforeSix weeks | AfterSix minutes | Review-ready, risks and mitigations already written up. |
| Processors·Art. 28 | BeforeTwo days a contract | AfterFour minutes | One or a hundred, same Article 28 process, same depth. |
| Incidents·Art. 33 | Before72-hour clock | AfterThree minutes | Facts, deadline and notification drafts, with hours still on the clock. |
| Evidence·Art. 5(2) | BeforeHours of digging | AfterAlready there | Stays attached to the record it belongs to, from creation. |
See what agentic compliance could change for your team.
Book a demo →Features you’ll love.
You’ve seen the hours come back — here’s where they come from.
Analyse your processor’s compliance
with Article 28? Done in one click.
Name a vendor. Legiscope reads its data processing addendum against Article 28 and writes the assessment section by section — the wording it relies on, the reasoning, the verdict.
- 3Confidentiality of Customer Data
- 5Security of Data Processing
- 6Sub-processing
- 10AWS Certifications and Audits
- 11Customer Audits
- 12Transfers of Personal Data
- 14Return or Deletion of Data
- +10further sections
Can they change who touches your data without telling you?
“At least 30 days before AWS engages a Sub-processor, AWS will update the applicable website and provide Customer with a mechanism to obtain notice of that update. To object to a Sub-processor, Customer can: (i) terminate the Agreement pursuant to its terms; (ii) cease using the Service for which AWS has engaged the Sub-processor; or (iii) move the relevant Customer Data to another Region…”
Article 28(2) allows a general authorisation on one condition: you are told before the change, and left a way to object. Thirty days’ notice, a mechanism that delivers it and three named exits meet it — but the notice is published to a website, so the window only runs if somebody on your side is subscribed to it. The clause is AWS’s to satisfy; the thirty days are yours to catch.
Seventeen sections, two minutes — against about forty-five by hand, per contract.Wording quoted verbatim from the AWS GDPR Data Processing Addendum.
Your entire vendor list,
assessed for GDPR compliance in 90 seconds.
Not a security questionnaire — the contract itself. You send us nothing: Legiscope finds each vendor’s data processing addendum on its own legal pages, keeps a dated copy, and checks it against all eight requirements of Article 28(3).
Re-read whenever a vendor changes its paper — that is how you find out, rather than the regulator.
Describe your business in three lines.
Get your Article 30 register in four minutes.
Not a list of activity names — the record itself. Legiscope reads the guidance, the statutes and the registers of comparable companies, then writes each activity out: what it is for, the lawful basis it stands on, how long you keep the data and who else sees it.
The same agentic advantage,
workflow by workflow.
Agents read the source material, prepare the work, and keep every decision with its evidence.
RoPA
The register of processings, written and kept current from your own material.
Explore RoPA →Art. 28Processors
Connect processors, subprocessors, safeguards and supporting evidence.
Explore processors →Art. 5(2)Audits
Apply the same legal conditions across every processing activity and expose the priorities.
Explore audits →Art. 35DPIAs
From processing record to review-ready assessment in minutes.
Explore DPIAs →Art. 33 · 34Incidents
Facts, deadlines, reasoning and notification drafts prepared while your team decides.
Explore incidents →The agents prepare.
Your team decides.
Sources
Everything the agents write is drawn from your own material — contracts, registers, statutes — and cites where it came from.
Review
Work arrives as drafts and recommendations, laid out with what was read and what was concluded, ready to check.
Judgement
Questions of risk, necessity and proportionality are framed with the relevant facts and routed to your team to decide.
Accountability
Every decision is filed with its author, date, reasoning and evidence — the record Article 5(2) expects you to show.
See how agentic compliance can
transform your privacy programme.
Your own workflows, prepared, connected and review-ready.
Book your demo →