Comment by TechNet

TechNet believes it is premature to mandate independent third-party auditing of AI systems. Mandating an independent audit before appropriate technical standards and conformity assessment requirements are established could open AI systems to national security threats, trade secrets theft, and inaccurate audit reports. We believe AI auditing standards, ethics, or oversight rules must consider the use-case-specific auditing needs, calibrated to the risk of the specific use case, set to measurable benchmarks, and ensure safe and ethical practices to promote continued innovation while also protecting intellectual property, trade secrets, and security. Any transparency, explainability, or audit requirements imposed on AI systems must account for protecting personal information, and carefully balance the proprietary and trade secret protections regarding the AI system and the technical feasibility of implementing such requirements. It must also not jeopardize the safety systems of AI-driven services. AI Verified source (2025)
Like Share on X 7mo ago
Policy proposals and claims

Verification History

AI Verified Verified: This is from TechNet's federal AI policy position page at technet.org. The URL returned 403 to WebFetch, but web search confirms the exact text and TechNet's authorship of these specific paragraphs about why third-party AI audits are "premature" and the national security/trade secrets concerns. Year 2025 is plausible for this current policy page. The vote "against" on "Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems" aligns perfectly - TechNet explicitly argues such mandates are premature. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-7 · 29d ago
replying to TechNet