Scorecard/Red Queen Bio

Red Queen Bio

Data gathering in process

AI biosecurity company building scalable defenses against AI-enabled biological threats. Public Benefit Corporation backed by OpenAI.

HQUS
Est2025
Size11-50
EU AI ActLimited Risk
redqueen.bio
Score
43.0 / 100
Evidence
5 items

Developing safety practices - core foundations in place with room for improvement.

Strengths:Risk Assessment
Weaknesses:Governance Maturity, Technical Safety, Regulatory Readiness, External Engagement
Focus Areas
biosecuritybiodefenseai safetylab automation

Security Assessment

Security-relevant indicators for vendor evaluation

Security Posture
49
TS-01dim: 42
Red Teaming & Pre-deployment Testing
Adversarial testing before deployment
TS-05dim: 42
Robustness & Adversarial Resilience
Resistance to adversarial attacks
RA-01dim: 55
Sector-Specific Risk Assessment
Risk analysis for deployment context
RA-03dim: 55
Dual-Use & Misuse Risk
Dangerous capability awareness
RA-07dim: 55
Incident History & Track Record
Past incidents and response quality
EE-04dim: 45
Vulnerability Disclosure Program
Bug bounty or CVE reporting process
Incident History
Red Queen Bio incident records sourced from AIAAIC Repository and public reporting.
Integration: AIAAIC, OECD AI Incidents Monitor
Third-Party Audits
External audit reports, SOC 2 attestations, and ISO certifications verified where published.
Sources: Company filings, registry lookups
CVE & Disclosures
Known vulnerabilities and security advisories from NVD, GitHub Security Advisories, and vendor pages.
Sources: NVD, GHSA, vendor disclosure pages

Dimension Breakdown

GM
Governance Maturitymedium
Published policies, corporate structure, safety mandate, whistleblowing, executive commitment.
48
2 evidence items
GM-01GM-03
TS
Technical Safetymedium
Benchmarks, adversarial robustness, fine-tuning safety, watermarking, model cards, research output.
42
RA
Risk Assessmentlow
Dangerous capability evaluations, thresholds, external testing, bug bounty, halt conditions.
55
2 evidence items
RA-01RA-06
RR
Regulatory Readinesslow
ISO 42001, EU AI Act compliance, GPAI obligations, international commitments, incident reporting.
25
EE
External Engagementmedium
Survey participation, research support, transparency, behavior specs, open-source contributions.
45
1 evidence items
EE-02

Social Impact & Safety Profile

Strong

Red Queen Bio's core mission is preventing AI-enabled biological threats, one of the most consequential social impact areas in AI safety. Their biodefense work directly addresses catastrophic risk scenarios. The company's focus on biosafety represents active harm mitigation in a critical domain, though formal social impact reporting is still developing.

biosecuritycatastrophic risk preventionbiodefense
Why it matters for safety

AI×Bio is the dual-use category of greatest concern to the AI safety community. The same AI capabilities that accelerate drug discovery and medical research could theoretically be misused for pathogen design or biological weapon development.

Civilizational Risk Awareness

1/3

For a company operating at the AI×Bio intersection, the bar for catastrophic risk awareness should be higher than for other AI companies. The current level of public communication on this topic is insufficient for the risk profile.

Responsible Scaling Policy

None

No published RSP or equivalent. For an AI×Bio company, the equivalent would be a biosafety scaling policy governing how AI capabilities are gated against biosecurity risk thresholds.

Mission Drift Protection

0/3
  • No PBC status
  • No structural governance mechanisms
  • No published biosafety governance framework
  • No independent biosafety advisory board

Vulnerability Disclosure

None

No CVD programme. For an AI×Bio company, relevant vulnerabilities include: unintended generation of dangerous biological information, insufficient access controls on dual-use capabilities.

Safety Reporting

- None

No safety reporting. For an AI×Bio company, regular safety reporting is especially important given the dual-use risk profile.

Dual-Use Risk

SignificantAI×Bio

Significant dual-use risk. The absence of published biosecurity governance and dual-use assessment is the most important gap. Even well-intentioned companies at this intersection need structured, transparent governance. The industry lacks standards, but leadership companies should set the standard rather than wait for it.

Mitigation details
Operates within regulated biological research frameworks
No published dual-use risk assessment
No independent dual-use review board
No industry standard for AI×Bio dual-use governance exists to benchmark against
No published biosecurity policy specific to AI capabilities

Need a detailed report for Red Queen Bio?

Subscribe to express interest in indicator-level evidence, peer benchmarking, and regulatory gap analysis - or reach out to request a full company overview brief.