Review OpenRouter integration for regulatory compliance (SOC2, GDPR, HIPAA). Use when preparing for audits, evaluating data handling, or documenting compliance posture. Triggers: 'openrouter compliance', 'openrouter gdpr', 'openrouter soc2', 'openrouter data residency'.
Scanned 9/12/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add aibot88/sec_skill_store --skill openrouter-compliance-review --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Openrouter Compliance Review?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/aibot88-openrouter-compliance-review)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: openrouter-compliance-review
description: |
Review OpenRouter integration for regulatory compliance (SOC2, GDPR, HIPAA). Use when preparing for audits, evaluating data handling, or documenting compliance posture. Triggers: 'openrouter compliance', 'openrouter gdpr', 'openrouter soc2', 'openrouter data residency'.
allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep
version: 2.0.0
license: MIT
author: Jeremy Longshore <jeremy@intentsolutions.io>
compatible-with: claude-code, codex, openclaw
tags: [saas, openrouter, compliance, security, governance]
---
# OpenRouter Compliance Review
## Overview
OpenRouter is a proxy that routes requests to upstream providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, etc.). Compliance depends on both OpenRouter's data handling and the selected provider's policies. Key considerations: data transit through OpenRouter infrastructure, provider-specific data retention, model selection for regulated data, and audit trail requirements.
## Compliance Checklist
```python
COMPLIANCE_CHECKLIST = {
"data_handling": [
"Verify OpenRouter does NOT train on your data (confirmed in their privacy policy)",
"Confirm provider-level data policies (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google each differ)",
"Document data flow: your app -> OpenRouter -> provider -> OpenRouter -> your app",
"Identify if prompts contain PII, PHI, or regulated data",
"Implement PII redaction before sending to API",
],
"access_control": [
"Use per-service API keys (not shared keys)",
"Set credit limits per key to isolate blast radius",
"Rotate keys on a 90-day schedule",
"Store keys in secrets manager (not .env files in repos)",
"Enable management keys for programmatic key provisioning",
],
"audit_trail": [
"Log every API call with generation_id, model, user_id, cost",
"Hash prompts (SHA-256) instead of logging raw content",
"Retain audit logs per regulation (90d operational, 7yr financial)",
"Ship logs to append-only storage (S3, immutable DB)",
],
"provider_selection": [
"Route regulated data only to compliant providers",
"Use provider routing to exclude non-compliant providers",
"Document which models are approved for which data classifications",
"Test that fallback routing doesn't route to unapproved providers",
],
}
```
## Provider Routing for Compliance
```python
import os
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://openrouter.ai/api/v1",
api_key=os.environ["OPENROUTER_API_KEY"],
default_headers={"HTTP-Referer": "https://my-app.com", "X-Title": "my-app"},
)
# Route ONLY to specific providers (e.g., Anthropic for SOC2)
response = client.chat.completions.create(
model="anthropic/claude-3.5-sonnet",
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Analyze this contract..."}],
max_tokens=2048,
extra_body={
"provider": {
"order": ["Anthropic"], # Only Anthropic's infrastructure
"allow_fallbacks": False, # Do NOT fall back to other providers
},
},
)
# Verify which provider actually served the request
print(f"Served by: {response.model}") # Should match anthropic/claude-3.5-sonnet
```
## Data Classification Matrix
| Classification | Allowed Providers | Controls |
|---------------|-------------------|----------|
| Public | Any (including `:free`) | Standard logging |
| Internal | Tier 1 (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) | Audit logging, key limits |
| Confidential | Anthropic, OpenAI (API-only) | PII redaction, no free models |
| Restricted/PHI | BYOK only or self-hosted | Full audit, encryption at rest |
## BYOK for Data Sovereignty
```python
# Bring Your Own Key -- requests go directly to provider
# OpenRouter acts as router only; data doesn't persist on OpenRouter
response = client.chat.completions.create(
model="openai/gpt-4o",
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Process this..."}],
max_tokens=1024,
extra_body={
"provider": {
"order": ["OpenAI"],
"allow_fallbacks": False,
},
},
# With BYOK, configure your provider key in OpenRouter dashboard
# Data flows: your app -> OpenRouter (routing only) -> OpenAI (your account)
)
```
## Compliance Audit Script
```bash
#!/bin/bash
echo "=== OpenRouter Compliance Audit ==="
# 1. Verify API key has credit limit set
echo "1. Key configuration:"
curl -s https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/auth/key \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $OPENROUTER_API_KEY" | \
jq '{label: .data.label, limit: .data.limit, is_free_tier: .data.is_free_tier}'
# 2. Check if using free tier (not suitable for regulated data)
IS_FREE=$(curl -s https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/auth/key \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $OPENROUTER_API_KEY" | jq -r '.data.is_free_tier')
[ "$IS_FREE" = "true" ] && echo "WARNING: Free tier. Not suitable for regulated data."
# 3. Scan for hardcoded keys in source
FOUND=$(grep -r "sk-or-v1-" --include="*.py" --include="*.ts" --include="*.js" . 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules | wc -l)
echo "Hardcoded keys found: $FOUND"
```
## Error Handling
| Error | Cause | Fix |
|-------|-------|-----|
| Request routed to unapproved provider | `allow_fallbacks: true` (default) | Set `allow_fallbacks: false` with explicit `order` |
| Key exposed in logs | Raw API key logged | Add PII redaction for `sk-or-v1-*` pattern |
| No audit trail for request | Logging middleware bypassed | Make audit logging a required wrapper |
| Free model used for regulated data | No model allowlist | Implement model allowlist in client wrapper |
## Enterprise Considerations
- OpenRouter does not train on API data, but upstream providers may have different terms for API vs consumer use
- Use `provider.order` + `allow_fallbacks: false` to guarantee data only flows to approved providers
- BYOK eliminates OpenRouter as a data processor for inference (routing metadata still transits)
- Document the data flow diagram for auditors: client -> OpenRouter (routing) -> provider (inference)
- Implement client-side PII redaction as defense-in-depth
- Consider self-hosted or VPC deployments for restricted/PHI data
## References
- [Examples](${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/examples.md) | [Errors](${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/errors.md)
- [Privacy Policy](https://openrouter.ai/privacy) | [Provider Routing](https://openrouter.ai/docs/features/provider-routing)
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!