AI Vendor Packet
IndexableTrust CenterLast reviewed 2026-05-21

How to keep Trust Center commitments aligned with vendor changes

Trust Center drift usually starts when a short public sentence outlives the vendor source that supported it. The fix is to tie each material Trust Center statement to a vendor source, product scope, owner, and review date.

Review Trust Center driftView all guides

Workflow steps

4 practical steps

Records to keep

3 examples

Source links

4 official sources

Step-by-step process

Step 1

Inventory public statements

List Trust Center language about AI data use, model training, retention, subprocessors, vendor review cadence, DPA coverage, and security evidence.

Step 2

Attach source evidence

For each statement, attach the vendor source or internal evidence that supports it. If the source is product-specific, include product scope in the public or internal note.

Step 3

Create a review trigger

Trigger review when an official source changes, a new vendor is added, a data flow changes, or a customer asks for a stronger commitment.

Step 4

Publish narrow updates

Prefer narrow, cited updates over broad claims. Keep customer-specific contract language out of generic Trust Center copy unless legal approves it.

Records to keep

  • A Trust Center AI policy section with last reviewed date.
  • A vendor source map for OpenAI, Slack, Intercom, Zendesk, and Microsoft 365 Copilot.
  • A decision log row for a statement that does not need customer notice but needs a source date update.

Where mistakes happen

  • Using one public AI sentence for API, workspace, and consumer AI tools.
  • Publishing a subprocessor claim without the current official source link.
  • Letting sales questionnaire answers become public policy without review.

Lightweight version

For a startup, maintain a short Trust Center appendix with vendor name, product path, source link, commitment, and last reviewed date.

More mature version

For a mature team, route Trust Center changes through source review, legal or privacy approval, customer impact assessment, and publication history.

Source links

These are starting sources for the examples in this guide. Review the vendor page for scope and limitations before changing customer commitments.

Data controls in the OpenAI platformhttps://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/your-dataOfficial sourceSlack Data Processing Addendahttps://slack.com/terms-of-service/data-processingOfficial sourceIntercom Data Processing Agreementhttps://www.intercom.com/legal/data-processing-agreementOfficial sourceZendesk Trust Centerhttps://www.zendesk.com/trust-center/Official source

Related templates

Trust Center AI policy templateUse this template to write a calm public AI policy that tells customers what is used, what is not promised, and how vendor evidence is reviewed. Keep it specific enough to be useful and narrow enough to stay accurate.Customer notification decision log templateUse this log to record the decision, not just the change. It keeps customer notice decisions grounded in source evidence, contract review, and owner approval.Vendor commitment drift registerUse this register as the working list for vendor changes that may affect customer promises. It is not a risk score. It is a way to avoid quiet drift.

Related vendor pages

OpenAIReview OpenAI API, DPA, privacy, subprocessors, retention, and model training sources for SaaS customer commitments.SlackReview Slack privacy, terms, DPA, security, and data-use sources for SaaS customer commitments.IntercomReview Intercom privacy, terms, DPA, security, and data-use sources for SaaS customer commitments.ZendeskReview Zendesk privacy, terms, DPA, security, and data-use sources for SaaS customer commitments.

Generate a review packet from this workflow.

Select your vendors, data categories, and customer commitments. AI Vendor Packet turns the workflow into evidence your team can review.

Review Trust Center driftBrowse templates