Kolar

Kolar decides. Forest proves it.

Kolar brings the agent: the compliance decision logic, PEP/sanctions screening, merchant verification, enhanced due diligence. Forest brings the control plane: data access, RBAC, the audit trail. Kolar's agents run inside Forest's runtime; Forest governs and logs every action, human or agent — same rules for both.

Screening asks: is this match a false positive? The audit asks: who decided, when, under which rules — and can you prove it?

Kolar answers the first question. Forest answers the second, for every agent connected to the client's infrastructure — not just Kolar.

iWhy this partnership is meaningful.

Every new source Kolar wants to reach is an integration to open and an RBAC scope for the client's security and compliance teams to revalidate. At banking-group-backed fintechs, that's exactly what stalls a deployment: a new AI vendor with direct data access triggers 6 to 12 months of group-level validation, with an uncertain outcome.

Forest is already that validated layer.

Live, read-write, governed by RBAC already in place — collection-level permissions, conditional permissions, per-user scopes — no ETL project, no pipeline to maintain. Kolar inherits an already-audited perimeter instead of opening a new one. The model is swappable. The trust layer isn't.

Swan already runs this way.

Kolar (merchant verification) and Forest (transaction monitoring) operate side by side, at the same client, each on its own perimeter, under the same governance.

One more agent. One audit trail.