STALE: OUR MEASUREMENT

Our published benchmark result was measured with v0.41.2, 5 releases ago, past this project's own 2-release window, and the newest real-model measurement, dated 2026-09-18, is past this project's own 7-day window. That is our own number, not your assessment, which runs against your policy on the current release. Why, and what unblocks it

STALE: REGULATORY CLOCK

The regulatory entries on this page were last checked against their primary sources on — 34 days before this build’s anchor of , past this project’s own 30-day window. Every date here was true when it was read and has not been re-read since. Verify against the primary source before relying on it. The clock, with every source

ProvaelGitHub, star the repositoryQuickstart
ISO 25785-1 (ISO/TC 299 WG 12)

ISO 25785-1 · dynamically stable robots

ISO 25785-1 is the first Type-C (machine-specific) safety standard aimed at dynamically stable robots: legged and humanoid machines that stay upright by continuously controlling balance. It is a Committee Draft and is not published. Provael’s humanoid suite tests the balance-and-fall hazards it addresses, on a CPU fixture: anticipatory evidence, with no clause yet to conform to.

Timing Committee Draft (ISO/CD 25785-1), not published, with no fixed publication date.

From the regulatory clock

At a glance

Read from the site’s regulatory clock, the record that is re-verified against primary law, as of 19 September 2026.

Instrument
ISO/CD 25785-1 — Robotics: safety requirements for dynamically stable industrial mobile robots (legged, wheeled, or other forms of locomotion) — Part 1: Robots — Draft standard — not published, nothing to conform to yet
Applies?
No fixed applicable date - there is nothing to count down to.
Responsible actor
Manufacturer of the dynamically stable industrial mobile robot.
What Provael measures toward it
Nothing toward conformity: there is no stable clause to cite. The humanoid attack family produces an anticipatory adversarial-robustness baseline that exists ahead of the standard.
What that does not establish
No conformity position of any kind against a text that is not published, and no prediction of what the published text will require.
Source and review
Primary source · verified 19 September 2026
Use it for

What a Provael report can be used for

The hazard a legged machine adds

A fall. A centre of mass leaving the support polygon. A self-collision. A footstep into a keep-out zone. These are hazards a statically stable arm does not have, and they are the hazards a dynamically stable machine has to argue about.

The evidence

  • The shipped whole-body humanoid suite, whose unsafe predicate is a fall or topple, a centre-of-mass excursion outside the support polygon, a self-collision, or a footstep keep-out breach.
  • balance_spoof (EAI02) — spoof the policy toward a loss of balance and score whether it recovers or steps unsafely.
  • whole_body_hijack (EAI04) — redirect the commanded whole-body motion.
  • stride_freeze (EAI04) — stall the gait mid-stride.
  • An adversarial-robustness baseline and a repeatable harness you can point at your own policy, ahead of the standard.
Limits

What it cannot be used for

A mapping identifies possible relevance. It does not establish that this framework applies to your product, that anything here is compliance, that an assessor or insurer will accept it, or a real-world risk probability. Whether it applies to your product depends on your role, market and product class: a question for your counsel, not a determination this page makes.

  • No conformity position against ISO 25785-1, which does not yet exist to hold one against, and no clause citation, because no clause numbering is stable enough to cite. Presenting a measurement against an unpublished draft as conformity would be inventing a route; presenting it as nothing would be pretending the hazard is not already testable.
  • No humanoid policy result. These three attacks ship stub-validated on the deterministic CPU humanoid suite, and no real-model transfer is claimed: a fixture’s success rate is a property of the fixture, not of a humanoid policy. The real GR00T-N1 humanoid transfer study is pre-registered and has not been run.
  • Simulation evidence for the tested checkpoint and protocol. Physical safety and conformity require separate assessment.
  • Provael measures adversarial robustness - susceptibility to manipulation - not general accuracy, reliability, or functional safety.
  • The measured result uses templated, auditable attacks; the search-based families (optimized, universal_patch, gradient_patch) have no real-policy rate. Results are a floor on susceptibility - a behavioural lower bound, not a certified worst-case bound.
  • Provael’s own Embodied AI Security Top 10 is an independent taxonomy maintained by Provael, not one of the instruments on this page; a mapping onto it is a categorisation, not a legal or standards requirement.
Evidence, not certification

Running Provael does not make a system compliant or certified - it generates measurements you can put into a conformity or assurance file. Provael is not a notified body, a lab, or a certification scheme.

Independent project. Not affiliated with or endorsed by ISO, the EU, NIST, IEC, OWASP, or MITRE. Not legal advice.

Clause references are indicative: check each against the text you hold before you cite it.

What it is

The framework

  • ISO 25785-1 is being developed by ISO/TC 299 (Robotics) Working Group 12, covering industrial mobile robots that are dynamically stable — legged and humanoid machines that stay upright by continuously controlling balance.
  • It is a Type-C standard: specific to a machine category, sitting above the general safety standards rather than replacing them.
  • It is not published, and no publication date is fixed. This site previously described it as a Working Draft; it moved to Committee Draft on 8 May 2026, which is a later stage and a material difference — a CD is out for committee consultation, a WD is not. Until it lands there is no clause list, no numbering and no conformity route to map onto.
  • Until then, a humanoid builder’s safety file leans on the general machinery route (EU Machinery Regulation 2023/1230, Annex I Part A) plus the functional-safety standards (IEC 61508, ISO 13849) — which is why those three pages exist alongside this one.
Timing

Dates (verified 19 September 2026)

Status
Committee Draft (ISO/CD) — not publishedISO/TC 299 WG 12. CD registered 8 May 2026, consultation opened 12 May 2026; no fixed publication date. Verify the live ISO record before relying on any date; a draft standard’s timetable moves, and this page carried the previous stage for months.

Check the live EUR-Lex or ISO text before relying on a date.

Sources

Primary references

Sample SARIF ↓All frameworks

See what a report contains.

The sample report comes from a public run and is published in full, nothing redacted. To have this mapping filled in for your own policy, request a scoping call.

See the sample reportRequest a scoping call