Industries · Military & Defense · Record Substrate
Your AI agents are acting on controlled data an assessor will ask you to account for.
Defense contractors are moving agentic systems into production against CUI. CMMC and NIST 800-171 expect an attributable record of that access. Built by a veteran-led team, the substrate produces it, inside your own boundary, designed to run air-gapped. Until the model runs inside your boundary, the model path leaves it: that path is not air-gapped and is not for CUI or classified information.
§ 01 Why now
Can you account for what your agents did with CUI?
2026 to 2027
Enforcement. The assessor asks.
The NDAA for FY2026 directs the Department of Defense to build an AI security framework. The obligation to account for what an agent did against controlled data arrives before the rule that names it.
The assessment question
If a DoD assessor asked you to reconstruct every action your agents took against controlled data last quarter, what would you show them?
§ 02 Use cases
Where the substrate lands first.
Contract work on CUI
Agents that draft, review, and reconcile against controlled data, with access attributed and reviewable.
Restricted and disconnected environments
Coordination, policy, and the record run inside your boundary. The substrate is designed to run air-gapped: once installed, the substrate needs no route out, so it fits environments that cannot reach the open internet. An offline install path is on the roadmap. The substrate is designed to run air-gapped; the models are not yet. Sovereign-model deployment inside the perimeter, where even the model behind the agent runs without outbound traffic, is on the roadmap through our model-training pipeline. In a fully self-hosted deployment, with the model on your GPUs and the record and telemetry on your own infrastructure, your data stays in your perimeter. That is a configuration you set, not the shipped default.
The defense supply chain
Prime and subcontractor accountability across handoffs: which agent acted, under whose authority, against which controlled resource.
§ 03 Against the frameworks
Measured against what the assessment expects.
CMMC, the NIST 800-171 and 800-53 baselines, and the DoD Impact Levels point toward a common expectation: access to controlled data must be attributed, reviewable, and kept inside a controlled boundary.
This material does not constitute legal or regulatory advice, and Subnet345 holds no CMMC certification or Impact Level authorization. Assess your obligations with your assessor.
Sources: CMMC 2.0 (DoD CIO); NIST SP 800-171 (CMMC and DFARS enforce Rev 2 today; Rev 3 is the current NIST publication) and SP 800-53 (Rev 5); DoD Impact Levels (DoD Cloud SRG). Regulatory mapping reviewed: August 2026. Informational, not legal advice.
Related
Adjacent sectors, and the substrate itself.
The question we help you answer