1. Home
  2. Promise Tracker

The Promise Tracker · checked Nov 10, 2026

The Promise Tracker

The Promise Tracker lists 47 public safety promises made by the 11 SI labs on the Containment Board and their leaders, each with its primary source, its date and a status. A promise is marked Kept or Not met only when a reputable public source reports it, and that source is named and linked. As of November 10, 2026, 11 are reported kept, 4 not met and 2 withdrawn; the other 30 are in progress or have no public evidence yet.

Promises
47
Labs
11
Reported kept
11
Reported not met
4

The tally

What the labs promised, and what happened

Every status comes with a named public source, except the two cautious ones. The bars show each lab's promises by status; the chip is its Containment Board grade.

47

Promises

11

Kept

4

Not met

2

Withdrawn

18

In progress

12

No evidence yet

  1. Anthropic5B+
  2. OpenAI7B
  3. Google DeepMind5B-
  4. Microsoft6C+
  5. Meta5C+
  6. Amazon5C
  7. xAI4D+
  8. Mistral3D
  9. Z.ai (Zhipu)3D
  10. Alibaba (Qwen)2D-
  11. DeepSeek2F

Every promise

All 47 promises, newest first

Filter by status, lab or topic. Each entry gives the exact words when they are short enough, the primary source, the status with its own source and the day it was checked.

Showing 47 of 47 promises

No public evidence yetMistral

Red-team the model with cybersecurity leaders, partners and state authorities before releasing its weights.

Mistral AI, announcing Mistral Large 4

Exact words

"we are red-teaming the model in real-world settings with cybersecurity leaders, vetted partners, and state authorities"

Source Introducing Mistral Large 4 Mistral AI ·

No public evidence yet. No evaluator, method or result has been published; the weights were released on Oct 29, 2026.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressMeta

Not release a high-risk model externally without strong evidence that mitigations bring the risk down.

Meta, Superintelligence Scaling Framework 2.1

Exact words

"we will not deploy the model externally unless we have strong additional evidence"

Source Meta Superintelligence Scaling Framework, Version 2.1 Meta ·

In progress. The framework took effect in October 2026; Meta has not published an outside audit of it.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressAmazon

Not deploy a model that meets a Critical Capability Threshold until safeguards mitigate the risk.

Amazon, Frontier Model Safety Framework

Exact words

"we will not deploy the model until safeguards appropriately mitigate the risks."

Source Amazon's Frontier Model Safety Framework (September 2026) Amazon ·

In progress. METR concluded that Nova 2.0 Lite does not cross the automated research Critical Capability Threshold.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressAmazon

Publish safety evaluation reports for its most capable frontier models.

Amazon, Frontier Model Safety Framework

Exact words

"we publish safety evaluation reports for our most capable frontier models"

Source Amazon's Frontier Model Safety Framework (September 2026) Amazon ·

In progress. An evaluation report for Nova 2.0 Lite was posted to arXiv by Amazon authors on Jan 27, 2026.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressAnthropic

Publish Risk Reports on its deployed models, and let outside reviewers check them when the Long-Term Benefit Trust asks.

Anthropic, Responsible Scaling Policy 3.4

Summary in our words

Source Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy Anthropic ·

In progress. Version 3.4 took effect on Jul 8, 2026; no outside review of a Risk Report has been published yet.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetxAI

Send authorities a copy of incident reports.

xAI, Frontier Artificial Intelligence Framework

Exact words

"will provide the relevant authorities with a copy of the incident report"

Source xAI Frontier Artificial Intelligence Framework xAI ·

No public evidence yet. FLI found no misuse or misalignment transparency reports from xAI (Jul 14, 2026).

Checked · Report a correction

In progressGoogle DeepMind

Back any model that reaches a Critical Capability Level with a safety case before deployment.

Google DeepMind, Frontier Safety Framework 3.1

Exact words

"Where the model has reached a CCL, the residual risk assessment will be supplemented with a safety case."

Source Frontier Safety Framework, Version 3.1 Google DeepMind ·

In progress. Google's Gemini 4 Argon safety report (Oct 13, 2026) says it cannot rule out the cybersecurity Critical Capability Level; no safety case has been published.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressMicrosoft

Pause development and deployment of a model whose risk it cannot sufficiently mitigate.

Microsoft, Frontier Governance Framework

Exact words

"we will pause development and deployment until the point at which mitigation practices evolve to meet the risk"

Source Frontier Governance Framework (February 2026) Microsoft ·

In progress. No public record of a pause has been reported.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetMicrosoft

Publish each covered model's evaluations and its risk classification.

Microsoft, Frontier Governance Framework

Exact words

"relevant evaluations, and the model's risk classification will be shared publicly"

Source Frontier Governance Framework (February 2026) Microsoft ·

No public evidence yet. The MAI-Thinking-1 technical report (Jun 2, 2026) gives safety benchmark results but no frontier risk classification.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressMicrosoft

Build superintelligence only within limits that keep humans in control.

Mustafa Suleyman, CEO of Microsoft AI

Exact words

"we are not building a superintelligence at any cost, with no limits"

Source Towards Humanist Superintelligence Microsoft AI ·

In progress. Microsoft's Frontier Governance Framework (Feb 2026) puts limits in writing, including a pause commitment.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressAmazon

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

Amazon, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressAnthropic

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

Anthropic, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressGoogle DeepMind

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

Google, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressMicrosoft

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

Microsoft, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressMistral

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

Mistral AI, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressOpenAI

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

OpenAI, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressxAI

Follow the Safety and Security chapter of the EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice for its most capable models.

xAI, a signatory of the EU Code of Practice

Summary in our words

Source The General-Purpose AI Code of Practice: signatories European Commission ·

In progress. The European Commission lists the signature (page updated Oct 7, 2026); the EU AI Office has not published an assessment of compliance. xAI signed the Safety and Security chapter only.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetMeta

Be rigorous about superintelligence risks and careful about what Meta open sources.

Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta

Exact words

"We'll need to be rigorous about mitigating these risks and careful about what we choose to open source."

Source Personal Superintelligence Meta ·

No public evidence yet. No public, reputable assessment of this pledge was found.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressOpenAI

Stop developing a model that reaches a Critical capability until matching safeguards exist.

OpenAI, Preparedness Framework version 2

Exact words

"Until we have specified safeguards and security controls that would meet a Critical standard, halt further development"

Source Preparedness Framework, Version 2 OpenAI ·

In progress. OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra System Card (Sep 3, 2026) rates the model Critical in cybersecurity. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that OpenAI has rolled back commitments through its updated framework.

Checked · Report a correction

Not metxAI

Publish a revised safety framework within three months of the February 2025 draft.

xAI, in its draft Risk Management Framework

Exact words

"We plan to release an updated version of this policy within three months."

Source xAI Risk Management Framework (Draft) xAI ·

Not met: reported by TechCrunch on May 13, 2025: the May 10 deadline "came and went without acknowledgement on xAI's official channels." METR lists the first full version from August 2025.

xAI's promised safety report is MIA TechCrunch ·

Checked · Report a correction

WithdrawnMeta

Stop developing a model that reaches the critical risk threshold if the risk cannot be mitigated.

Meta, Frontier AI Framework

Exact words

"If a frontier AI is assessed to have reached the critical risk threshold and cannot be mitigated, we will stop development"

Source Frontier AI Framework Meta ·

Withdrawn: reported by the Future of Life Institute on Jul 14, 2026: Meta "has also backslided on pause commitments". Its April 2026 revision changed the Critical response from Stop to Develop with Mitigations.

AI Safety Index, Summer 2026 (full report) Future of Life Institute ·

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetAlibaba (Qwen)

Publicly disclose its safety and security governance measures.

Alibaba, a signatory of China's AI Safety Commitments

Exact words

"Proactively disclose safety and security governance measures"

Source Artificial Intelligence Safety Commitments China AI Industry Alliance (AIIA) and CAICT ·

No public evidence yet. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that the company has no published safety framework.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetAlibaba (Qwen)

Red-team and rigorously test models before each release or update.

Alibaba, a signatory of China's AI Safety Commitments

Exact words

"Through dedicated simulation and red-teaming experts to rigorously test AI models prior to their release or update"

Source Artificial Intelligence Safety Commitments China AI Industry Alliance (AIIA) and CAICT ·

No public evidence yet. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that it found no public mention of outside pre-release testing.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetDeepSeek

Publicly disclose its safety and security governance measures.

DeepSeek, a signatory of China's AI Safety Commitments

Exact words

"Proactively disclose safety and security governance measures"

Source Artificial Intelligence Safety Commitments China AI Industry Alliance (AIIA) and CAICT ·

No public evidence yet. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that the company has no published safety framework.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetDeepSeek

Red-team and rigorously test models before each release or update.

DeepSeek, a signatory of China's AI Safety Commitments

Exact words

"Through dedicated simulation and red-teaming experts to rigorously test AI models prior to their release or update"

Source Artificial Intelligence Safety Commitments China AI Industry Alliance (AIIA) and CAICT ·

No public evidence yet. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that it found no public mention of outside pre-release testing.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetZ.ai (Zhipu)

Publicly disclose its safety and security governance measures.

Zhipu (Beijing Zhipu Huazhang Technology), a signatory of China's AI Safety Commitments

Exact words

"Proactively disclose safety and security governance measures"

Source Artificial Intelligence Safety Commitments China AI Industry Alliance (AIIA) and CAICT ·

No public evidence yet. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that the company has no published safety framework.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetZ.ai (Zhipu)

Red-team and rigorously test models before each release or update.

Zhipu (Beijing Zhipu Huazhang Technology), a signatory of China's AI Safety Commitments

Exact words

"Through dedicated simulation and red-teaming experts to rigorously test AI models prior to their release or update"

Source Artificial Intelligence Safety Commitments China AI Industry Alliance (AIIA) and CAICT ·

No public evidence yet. In its answer to FLI's survey (Jul 14, 2026), Z.ai said no outside pre-release testing was commissioned.

Checked · Report a correction

KeptAnthropic

Give the US AI Safety Institute access to major new models before and after public release.

Anthropic, in an agreement with the US AI Safety Institute

Exact words

"access to major new models from each company prior to and following their public release"

Source U.S. AI Safety Institute signs agreements regarding AI safety research, testing and evaluation with Anthropic and OpenAI NIST ·

Kept: reported by NIST, which published a joint US and UK pre-deployment test of the upgraded Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

US AISI and UK AISI Joint Pre-Deployment Test: Anthropic's Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024 Release) NIST ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptOpenAI

Give the US AI Safety Institute access to major new models before and after public release.

OpenAI, in an agreement with the US AI Safety Institute

Exact words

"access to major new models from each company prior to and following their public release"

Source U.S. AI Safety Institute signs agreements regarding AI safety research, testing and evaluation with Anthropic and OpenAI NIST ·

Kept: reported by NIST, which published a joint US and UK pre-deployment test of o1.

US AISI and UK AISI Joint Pre-Deployment Test: OpenAI o1 NIST ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptAmazon

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Amazon, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists the Frontier Model Safety Framework from February 2025.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptAnthropic

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Anthropic, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists the Responsible Scaling Policy from September 2023.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptGoogle DeepMind

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Google, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists the Frontier Safety Framework from May 2024.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptMeta

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Meta, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists the Frontier AI Framework from February 2025.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptMicrosoft

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Microsoft, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists the Frontier Governance Framework from February 2025.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

Not metMistral

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Mistral AI, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Not met: reported by the Future of Life Institute on Jul 14, 2026: Mistral has no published safety framework.

AI Safety Index, Summer 2026 (full report) Future of Life Institute ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptOpenAI

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

OpenAI, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists the Preparedness Framework from December 2023.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

KeptxAI

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

xAI, a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Kept: reported by METR, whose index lists a draft Risk Management Framework from February 2025 and the first full version from August 2025.

Frontier AI Safety Policies (index of published company frameworks) METR ·

Checked · Report a correction

Not metZ.ai (Zhipu)

Publish a safety framework for severe risks before the February 2025 summit in France.

Zhipu.ai (now Z.ai), a signatory of the Seoul commitments

Exact words

"publishing a safety framework focused on severe risks by the upcoming AI Summit in France"

Source Frontier AI Safety Commitments, AI Seoul Summit 2024 UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology ·

Not met: reported by the Future of Life Institute on Jul 14, 2026: "The company has no published framework."

AI Safety Index, Summer 2026 (full report) Future of Life Institute ·

Checked · Report a correction

In progressAmazon

Test models inside and outside the company before release.

Amazon, one of seven companies at the White House

Exact words

"internal and external security testing of their AI systems before their release"

Source Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration secures voluntary commitments from leading artificial intelligence companies to manage the risks posed by AI The White House (archived) ·

In progress. An independent CBRN uplift study for Nova 2.0 Lite is described in an Amazon paper (Jan 27, 2026); no government institute test was found.

Checked · Report a correction

KeptAnthropic

Test models inside and outside the company before release.

Anthropic, one of seven companies at the White House

Exact words

"internal and external security testing of their AI systems before their release"

Source Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration secures voluntary commitments from leading artificial intelligence companies to manage the risks posed by AI The White House (archived) ·

Kept: reported by NIST: the US and UK safety institutes tested the upgraded Claude 3.5 Sonnet before its October 2024 release.

US AISI and UK AISI Joint Pre-Deployment Test: Anthropic's Claude 3.5 Sonnet (October 2024 Release) NIST ·

Checked · Report a correction

In progressGoogle DeepMind

Test models inside and outside the company before release.

Google, one of seven companies at the White House

Exact words

"internal and external security testing of their AI systems before their release"

Source Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration secures voluntary commitments from leading artificial intelligence companies to manage the risks posed by AI The White House (archived) ·

In progress. Google's own Gemini 4 Argon safety report (Oct 13, 2026) names outside testers, including NIST CAISSI; no outside body has published its own report on it.

Checked · Report a correction

In progressMeta

Test models inside and outside the company before release.

Meta, one of seven companies at the White House

Exact words

"internal and external security testing of their AI systems before their release"

Source Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration secures voluntary commitments from leading artificial intelligence companies to manage the risks posed by AI The White House (archived) ·

In progress. FLI reported on Jul 14, 2026 that Meta used outside testers for Muse Spark before broad internal use, with publication rights not specified.

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetMicrosoft

Test models inside and outside the company before release.

Microsoft, one of seven companies at the White House

Exact words

"internal and external security testing of their AI systems before their release"

Source Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration secures voluntary commitments from leading artificial intelligence companies to manage the risks posed by AI The White House (archived) ·

No public evidence yet. The MAI-Thinking-1 technical report (Jun 2, 2026) names no outside tester of dangerous capabilities.

Checked · Report a correction

KeptOpenAI

Test models inside and outside the company before release.

OpenAI, one of seven companies at the White House

Exact words

"internal and external security testing of their AI systems before their release"

Source Fact sheet: Biden-Harris Administration secures voluntary commitments from leading artificial intelligence companies to manage the risks posed by AI The White House (archived) ·

Kept: reported by the UK AI Security Institute, which tested GPT-6 Astra before its public release.

GPT-6 Astra performs unsanctioned supply-chain attacks in simulations UK AI Security Institute ·

Checked · Report a correction

Not metOpenAI

Give 20% of its compute to the Superalignment team's work on controlling superintelligence.

OpenAI, in a post by Jan Leike and Ilya Sutskever

Exact words

"dedicating 20% of the compute we've secured to date over the next four years"

Source Introducing Superalignment OpenAI ·

Not met: reported by Fortune on May 21, 2024: "OpenAI never fulfilled its commitment to provide the team with 20% of its computing power."

OpenAI promised 20% of its computing power to combat the most dangerous kind of AI, but never delivered, sources say Fortune ·

Checked · Report a correction

WithdrawnGoogle DeepMind

Not pursue weapons or other technologies whose main purpose is to injure people.

Google, in "AI at Google: our principles" by CEO Sundar Pichai

Exact words

"Weapons or other technologies whose principal purpose or implementation is to cause or directly facilitate injury to people."

Source AI at Google: our principles Google ·

Withdrawn: reported by TechCrunch on Feb 4, 2025: Google removed the "applications we will not pursue" section, weapons included, from its published principles.

Google removes pledge to not use AI for weapons from website TechCrunch ·

Checked · Report a correction

No public evidence yetOpenAI

Stop competing with, and start assisting, a safety-conscious project that comes close to building AGI first.

OpenAI, in its Charter

Exact words

"we commit to stop competing with and start assisting this project"

Source OpenAI Charter OpenAI ·

No public evidence yet. The clause is still on the Charter page; no public report says it has been invoked.

Checked · Report a correction

The method

Five statuses, all of them sourced or cautious

A promise is listed only with a primary source. The status is the strongest one a reputable public source supports, and nothing stronger.

Status definitions

What each status means

  • Kept

    A reputable public source reports the promise fulfilled. The source is linked and named, with its date.

  • Not met

    A reputable public source reports that the promise was not fulfilled, or that a deadline passed without it.

  • Withdrawn

    The promise was removed or replaced by the one who made it, as a reputable public source reports.

  • In progress

    The promise is ongoing or not yet due, and public records show work toward it.

  • No public evidence yet

    No public, reputable source shows the promise kept or broken. This is the cautious default.

Corrections

Spotted an error?

Every entry links to its sources and the day it was checked. If a promise is missing, misquoted or has a newer status, send the public source on Telegram or X. Corrections are made in the open, with the new check date.

Cite the Promise Tracker

The Promise Tracker: public safety promises of SI labs. enterrsi.si, checked November 10, 2026. 47 promises, 11 labs. https://enterrsi.si/promises/

Free to cite under CC BY 4.0 with a link to enterrsi.si/promises/.

Embed

Put this tally on your site

A small card with the overall promise tally and a link back. It updates with each release of this page.

<div data-rsi-promises></div><script src="https://enterrsi.si/promises/embed.js" async></script>

Pass it on

Share the tracker

Share this pageShare on XShare on Telegram

Questions

Straight answers

How the tracker works, in four answers.

What counts as a promise?

A public, forward-looking commitment about safety made by a lab or its leader: in a signed public commitment such as the 2023 White House voluntary commitments or the 2024 Seoul Frontier AI Safety Commitments, in testimony, in a published framework or on the lab's own pages. Each one is listed only with that primary source.

Who decides whether a promise was kept?

Not this site. Kept, Not met and Withdrawn appear only when a reputable public source reports it, and the entry names that source and its date. Otherwise the status is In progress or No public evidence yet, and when in doubt the cautious status is used.

How does this relate to the Containment Board?

The Containment Board grades what each lab has in place today. The Promise Tracker follows what each lab said it would do. Each lab page links to the other.

How do I correct an entry?

Send the public source on Telegram or X. Corrections are made in the open, and the entry gets a new check date.

Enter RSI

Promises on one side, grades on the other

The Containment Board grades what each lab has in place today, from safety frameworks to whistleblower policies.