Skip to main content
🇳🇿 New Zealand · jurisdiction-aware

Three steps to decide if ReguNav fits New Zealand.

For CFOs, COOs, Heads of Risk supervised under New Zealand authority. Skip the architecture diagrams — see the regulator, the deliverable, and the ROI you'll quote to the board.

1. Identify your supervisorOffice of the Privacy Commissioner (NZ) (+1 more on this page)2. Pick your frameworkall 24 frameworks via crosswalk3. Book a New Zealand POC30-min walkthrough, real engine

Sovereign AI ready for New Zealand.

ReguNav supports AI vendors operating in New Zealand under the Privacy Act 2020 (OPC), and NCSC NZ cybersecurity assurance for critical infrastructure. Aligns with cross-Tasman APRA/OAIC programmes for ANZ-operating organisations.

New Zealand regulator landscape

Every New Zealand control on the platform is anchored to a named regulator artefact. When the regulator updates their guidance, the framework registry takes the bump and every dependent control inherits it.

Office of the Privacy Commissioner (NZ)

Privacy Act 2020official ↗

National Cyber Security Centre (NZ)

Cybersecurity assurance for critical infrastructureofficial ↗
From the taxonomy · auto-derived

Connected components for New Zealand.

Derived from @regunav/taxonomy at request time — add a new regulator / agent / framework to its source registry and it surfaces here automatically, no copy edits required.

What you get in New Zealand.

Honest status on every capability — live means wired end-to-end in production. Pick the ones your driver requires; we'll quote a date for anything not yet live.

Framework rule packs

Live
What you get
24 framework rule packs ship populated — SOC 2, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, GDPR, HIPAA, EU AI Act, FedRAMP and more — no empty schemas to fill in.
Problem solved
Buying a compliance tool and finding the rule library empty. Six weeks lost to copy-pasting control text from PDFs before the platform produces anything useful.
ROI
6 weeks saved on first-control-to-evidence onboarding.
Assumes: compared to building one control library per framework in-house.
See all capabilities →

Evidence ranker

Live
What you get
Ranks every artefact you upload against the control it best satisfies — across 24 frameworks at once.
Problem solved
GRC manager spends 8h/week mapping evidence to controls by hand. Most artefacts satisfy 4–7 controls; manual mapping captures one.
ROIinteractive
8h/wk of compliance-manager time reclaimed
Assumes: team of 50, 3 frameworks in scope, monthly evidence refresh.
See all capabilities →

Sealed evidence packs

Live
What you get
Content-addressed (sha256) evidence bundle the auditor pulls via URL. Replayable byte-for-byte from any timestamp.
Problem solved
Auditor email chain: 'send me the December evidence again, this time with the policy header'. Three round-trips per request.
ROIinteractive
$120k audit-prep cost avoided
Assumes: 3 framework audit, $250/h loaded GRC rate, baseline ~480h of prep.
See all capabilities →

WORM hash-chained audit trail

Live
What you get
Every action against your tenant logged immutably with a per-row hash chain. Tampering with one row breaks verification of every later row.
Problem solved
Regulator asks 'who approved that change on March 4?' and the answer is a Slack search and a memory.
ROI
Zero regulator findings on access-control evidence.
Assumes: banking-grade auditor sample (typically 25 events) verified against hash chain.
See all capabilities →

Regulator + auditor report packs

Live
What you get
Seven stakeholder-shaped report packs (board, regulator, auditor, customer DPA, internal audit, …) generated from your live D1 records.
Problem solved
Four days re-formatting the same data for the board pack, the regulator submission, and the customer security questionnaire.
ROIinteractive
$96k of GRC time saved annually on report assembly
Assumes: 48 stakeholder-days/yr of report formatting at $250/h.
See all capabilities →

Code Constitution™ GitHub App

Live
What you get
Compliance checks run inline on every PR (≤90s). Findings appear as line+column annotations in the review UI.
Problem solved
Compliance review happens quarterly. By the time the auditor flags a missing model card, it has been in production for 60 days.
ROIinteractive
$110k of audit-prep + remediation time saved annually
Assumes: ~20 engineers × 220 working days × 5% PR finding rate × 2h post-hoc cost at $250/h.
See all capabilities →

How to decide for New Zealand.

  1. 1. Identify your supervisor. Office of the Privacy Commissioner (NZ) (+ 1 more on this page).
  2. 2. Pick the framework that closes your audit. All 24 frameworks are mapped via crosswalk.
  3. 3. Run the ROI math. Each card above shows the assumption behind the number. Plug in your team size and audit cost — if it doesn't close, neither should the deal.
  4. 4. Book a 30-min walk-through. We demo against a synthetic New Zealand tenant — same engine that runs your production tenancy. No slide deck.

New Zealand SaaS, fintech, healthcare-AI, or essential-service?

We work with organisations supervised by every regulator listed above. The jurisdiction-aware engine routes incident reports, DSARs, and FRIA submissions to the correct authority + timeline automatically.

Talk to New Zealand team →

Jurisdiction codes + regulator data are sourced from @regunav/jurisdictions (Apache-2.0, open-source). Adding a new market is a single registry entry — no copy-paste regulator content. See /uk for the bespoke deep-dive template.