GPU Provider Security Questionnaire for Enterprise Teams

A security questionnaire for a GPU infrastructure provider is not a generic vendor form with the logo swapped. GPU estates concentrate physical security, hardware isolation, driver hygiene, and exit risk into one relationship, and generic SaaS questionnaires miss most of those surfaces. This page provides twelve question domains, the evidence a good answer cites, and the red flags that should end an evaluation, organized so a two-person review team can run it without outside consultants.

How to Run This Questionnaire

Send the twelve domains as a single packet with three requirements: answers must cite artifacts (reports, contracts, architecture documents) rather than assertions, scope must be stated for every certification claim, and evasive or marketing-only answers are recorded as red flags. Score per domain, not on average, because a failing isolation or regulated-data domain outweighs strong answers elsewhere.

Three rules make the questionnaire defensible:

1. Artifacts or it does not count. Every answer must cite a document: an architecture reference, a report with stated scope, a contract clause. Marketing assertions are recorded as unanswered.
2. Scope on every claim. A certification covers whatever its report says it covers; ask for the scope statement and the report itself, not the badge.
3. Score per domain. Weakness in a must-pass domain (isolation, regulated-data path) outweighs strength elsewhere; averages hide disqualifying gaps.

Send the domains in section two as a single packet so the provider answers once, and tell them in advance that evidence citations are required. Vendor-risk guidance consistently finds that a SOC 2 report answers some but not all cloud-specific questions, and that AI-specific surfaces need their own questions, which is what the twelve domains below encode.

The Twelve Question Domains, Evidence, and Red Flags

Ask twelve domains: tenant isolation, physical security, compliance artifacts, regulated-data path, data residency and replication, encryption and key handling, network isolation and egress control, vulnerability and patch management, logging and incident response, personnel and remote hands, subprocessors, and exit with deletion evidence. Each domain is scored on cited artifacts: architecture documents for isolation, the SOC 2 Type II report with scope for controls, a signed BAA for PHI paths, and contractual deletion commitments for exit.

Isolation and Physical Domains

The strongest isolation answers are architectural, not documentary. A provider running dedicated single-tenant bare-metal servers, as OneSource Cloud does in secure U.S. data centers, can answer with a physical boundary rather than configuration settings, which is a categorically stronger position when your reviewers assess blast radius.

Compliance and Regulated-Data Domains

A SOC 2 Type II report evidences that controls held over an audit period, and a BAA remains legally required for PHI regardless of SOC 2 status; the two answer different questions and neither substitutes for the other.

Operations and People Domains

Exit Domain

Scoring Answers and Escalation Triggers

Accept an answer only when it cites a verifiable artifact within stated scope; mark partial answers with a remediation deadline; and escalate on red flags: no isolation architecture beyond multi-tenant defaults, certification claims without scope or report access, refusal to sign a BAA for PHI workloads, or deletion commitments without evidence mechanics. Two or more red flags in must-pass domains disqualify regardless of other scores.

Put the rubric in the invitation packet so providers know answers are scored against artifacts rather than adjectives. That single disclosure filters out spray-and-pray respondents, shortens the review cycle, and prevents the later argument that the bar was invented after the answers arrived.

For regulated workloads, declare the must-pass domains in advance and in writing: tenant isolation, compliance artifacts, the regulated-data path, and exit. That declaration makes the review repeatable and prevents the quiet negotiation where a weak domain answer is traded against a discount.

FAQ

Do we still need a questionnaire if the provider has a SOC 2 report?

Yes, because the two artifacts answer different questions. A SOC 2 Type II report evidences that controls operated over an audit period within a stated scope, but GPU-specific surfaces such as tenant isolation architecture, firmware patching cadence, and exit deletion evidence need targeted questions, and HIPAA-regulated workloads additionally require a BAA that no certification replaces.

How does OneSource answer tenant-isolation questions on a security questionnaire?

OneSource answers with architecture rather than configuration: it runs dedicated single-tenant bare-metal GPU infrastructure in secure U.S. data centers, so tenant isolation is enforced by physical server boundaries instead of hypervisor settings, backed by SOC 2 Type II audit readiness and BAA-eligible dedicated environments as verifiable artifacts.