Which are your best settings for the strongest cybersecurity in Europe?

Community
, , ,
1

Strongest cybersecurity settings for GPT & AI GPT builders > Plugins / Actions builders (not just from Europe with NIS2 + EU AI Act + sovereignty.

Hi all :handshake:

I’m in the EU and want to standardize the strongest practical cybersecurity posture for GPT Builders. In Europe this is harder than elsewhere because we’re dealing with sovereignty expectations, multiple languages, and a moving compliance timeline (NIS2 national transposition + phased EU AI Act obligations). So I’m aiming for an “EU baseline” that stays defensible across Member States.

I’m preparing a complete article/checklist for faster, higher-quality outcomes, but before publishing I’d like to audit it with the community:

What are your non-negotiable settings/workflow rules in EU deployments?

(MFA/passkeys, session control, key hygiene, spend limits/alerts, logging/redaction, retention, incident response)

How do you handle “sovereign” requirements in practice (data residency, access control, vendor risk)?

Do you treat “private vs public profile” as sufficient, or do you enforce additional guardrails by default?

I know: In the UAE and in the UK are different structures, but the rules for best outcomes are easier.

Please avoid sharing any secrets/tokens/logs—redaction by default.

Thanks GPT builders and Community members!

Keep calm and stay out!

Reference (EU official):

EU AI Act policy

NIS2 transposition context

GDPR

MDR

2

EU AI Act (Reg (EU) 2024/1689): Regulation - EU - 2024/1689 - EN - EUR-Lex

NIS2 (Dir (EU) 2022/2555): Directive - 2022/2555 - EN - EUR-Lex

GDPR (Reg (EU) 2016/679): https://op.europa.eu/en/web/eu-law-in-force/bibliographic-details/-/elif-publication/3e485e15-11bd-11e6-ba9a-01aa75ed71a1

EDPB GDPR explainer: What is the GDPR? | European Data Protection Board

MDR (Reg (EU) 2017/745): Regulation - 2017/745 - EN - Medical Device Regulation - EUR-Lex

EC MDR overview: Medical devices - Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs

4

Thank you for your answer, @handpaniermedved :handshake:

Yes, I understand your point. In Hungary for examle, the risk landscape can feel more fragile; in Germany, the overall structure often feels more stable.

For builders, the European environment is more demanding than many other regions. It’s not only the EU AI Act, but also the combination of multiple languages, national sovereignty expectations, and country-specific rules layered on top of EU law. That makes implementation heavier and slower.

In my view, Europe sometimes struggles with speed when law, technology, and market reality move at different tempos. But the direction is still clear: the goals are right, and the economy will need AI.

From my perspective, OpenAI currently offers one of the strongest balances of safety, responsibility, and practical usability for builders. I prefer to focus on that standard rather than judging the ethics of others.

If you want, I can also make this a bit sharper and more “forum-native,” so it sounds even more natural in the Dev Community thread.

Community GPT builders

1 Like