KONFORM

EN 18031 · RED 2014/53/EU · CYBER RESILIENCE ACT — for connected-product brands selling in the EU

Your CE technical file, built and attacked before an auditor ever sees it.

Since August 2025, every Wi-Fi and Bluetooth product sold in the EU needs a cybersecurity assessment under EN 18031. Consultants charge €3,800–15,000 per product and take weeks. Konform generates the assessment and the technical file, runs a hostile verification pass against every claim, and hands you an audit-ready dossier — from €400 per SKU.

Documentation support — not certification. The difference matters, and we put it in writing.

AH-W1-CYB-001 · V1.1 · SAMPLE

RED Cybersecurity Assessment & Technical Documentation Package

AuraPlug W1 · Wi-Fi smart plug · EN 18031-1/-2:2024

NOT READY TO DECLARE
AUM-1Default credentials operable unchanged FAIL
SUM-2Signed OTA, ECDSA P-256 chain PASS
SCM-4Replay protection — no test record OPEN
CCK-3Static default secret present FAIL
CRY-1SOG-IS agreed mechanisms only PASS

31 requirements · derived totalsprovenance-tagged

31requirements assessed per product, enumerated — never asserted
2OJEU citation restrictions tracked on the EN 18031 series
€3,800what a service bureau charges for one product's file
497days until full CRA technical documentation is mandatory

§01 — The regulatory clock

Four deadlines. None of them move.

The EU spent 2025–26 softening its reporting mandates — and left every product-conformity mandate untouched. If you ship connected hardware, this is your calendar now.

EN 18031 mandatory

Cybersecurity essential requirements under RED apply to all internet-connected radio equipment. In force — today.

CRA reporting begins

24-hour early warning and 72-hour notification for exploited vulnerabilities — including products already on the market.

Machinery Regulation

Regulation (EU) 2023/1230 replaces the Machinery Directive. No transition for products placed after this date.

CRA in full

Annex VII technical documentation, SBOM, support-period declaration — for every product with digital elements.

§02 — Method

Generate. Attack. Tag. Then a human signs.

Most AI document tools have one model write something plausible and stop. Plausible is exactly what gets you excluded at audit. Konform is built around the opposite instinct.

STEP 1 / INTAKE & DRAFT

Structured intake, grounded generation

You answer a product questionnaire and upload what you have — schematics, test reports, SDK docs. The assessment is drafted against the normative clause text of the licensed standards, never a paraphrase. That distinction is written into the OJEU citation itself.

STEP 2 / HOSTILE REVIEW

A second system tries to destroy the draft

Before you see anything, an adversarial pass reviews the dossier the way a market-surveillance authority or competing consultant would: unverifiable claims, arithmetic that doesn't derive, verdicts without clause anchors, wrong standards in the DoC. What it finds gets fixed or flagged — never shipped silently.

STEP 3 / PROVENANCE & SIGN-OFF

Every verdict carries its evidence tag

Nothing in a Konform dossier claims to be "verified" unless someone verified it. Each verdict is tagged — declared, documented, or tested — and the Declaration of Conformity stays locked in draft until your responsible person signs. We never sign. That's the law, and it's also the point.

§03 — Verification, shown not told

We ran our own hostile review on our own sample. Here's what it caught.

VERIFICATION PASS · FINDING 07MAJOR

DRAFT v1.0, ANNEX A: Declaration of Conformity cited EN 62368-1 as the safety standard for a mains smart plug.

The conventional standard for that product class is EN 60669-2-1 (electronic switches). A competing consultant would use this single line to discredit the entire file.

RESOLVED in v1.1 — DoC restructured to Annex VI; safety standard corrected; change recorded in document history.

The first draft of our own sample dossier went through the same adversarial pass every customer dossier gets. The reviewer found ten defects — including three we're glad no customer ever saw:

  • A fabricated privacy section. The draft assessed EN 18031-2 with invented GDPR-style criteria instead of the standard's real mechanism families. Rebuilt from the actual structure.
  • Arithmetic that didn't derive. Headline totals summed to 35 against a 31-requirement register. Every number is now derived from the register — or it doesn't appear.
  • "Verified by scan" — by nobody. Observational language on evidence no one had observed. Every claim now carries a provenance tag instead.

A compliance product that can't audit itself has no business auditing your product. This page shows our findings because your auditor will look for the same ones.

§04 — The provenance rule

Three tags. No exceptions.

The fastest way to lose an audit is a technical file that overstates its own evidence. Every verdict in a Konform dossier declares exactly what it rests on:

MD

Manufacturer-declared

A questionnaire answer. Clearly labelled as unverified — so your auditor is never surprised, and neither are you.

MSR

Manufacturer-supplied report

A named document with a version — your lab's scan report, your SDK's crypto attestation — referenced, not absorbed.

IT

Independently tested

A named tester, a dated record, an identified sample. The only tag that earns the word "verified" anywhere in the file.

§05 — The arithmetic

Same file. Different decade.

Compliance consultantKonform
One product's EN 18031 assessment + technical file€3,800 – €15,000from €400
Turnaround4–10 weeksDays — most of it your evidence gathering
When a harmonised standard changesNew engagement, new invoiceAffected sections flagged & regenerated — included
Your 40-SKU catalogue€150,000+€690/month, all SKUs monitored
Tells you when you're not readySometimesAlways. Our sample dossier fails its own product — on purpose

§06 — Pricing

Priced against the consultant, not the template.

First assessment

€400 / SKU, one-time

  • Full EN 18031-1/-2 requirement register — 31 requirements, derived totals
  • RED Annex V technical file index with blocker classes
  • Findings, remediations & draft Declaration of Conformity
  • Hostile verification pass included
  • CRA forward-mapping for every artefact
Start with one SKU — try it now
FOR CATALOGUES

Portfolio

€690 / month, up to 50 SKUs

  • Everything in First assessment, for every SKU
  • Standards watch: OJEU citations, restriction changes, CRA harmonised standards — affected dossiers flagged & regenerated
  • EPR registration tracking per marketplace & country
  • CRA readiness: SBOM scaffolding, support-period declarations, incident-reporting runbook
  • Marketplace document packs (Amazon, Etsy compliance requests)
Request access

Signed

Custom / with human sign-off

  • Everything in Portfolio
  • Review & counter-signature by a partner EU Responsible Person
  • Notified-body coordination where presumption of conformity is unavailable
  • In preparation — join the waitlist to be first
Talk to us

§07 — What we are not

Read this before you pay us anything.

  • We are not a certification body. Konform produces audit-ready documentation. Conformity is declared by you, on your responsibility — that is how CE self-declaration works, and anyone who tells you otherwise is selling you a liability.
  • We do not replace your lab. Functional evidence — scans, update tests, RF reports — comes from real testing. We orchestrate it, structure it, and tell you exactly what's missing. We don't invent it, and our provenance tags make that impossible to hide.
  • Our sample dossier fails its own product. The AuraPlug W1 sample ships with two non-conformities and a blocked Declaration — because a tool that always says yes is worthless to you and dangerous to your director, who signs. Read the live sample report →

§08 — Questions

Asked by every brand we've spoken to.

Does my product actually need an EN 18031 assessment?
If it contains radio (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Zigbee, LTE…) and can reach the internet directly or through other equipment, then yes — since 1 August 2025, under Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/30. If it also processes personal data, EN 18031-2 applies on top. Our intake determines applicability per article, with the negative justifications documented — auditors ask for those too.
Is an AI-generated assessment even acceptable?
There is no EU rule against AI-assisted documentation — what matters is whether the content is correct, clause-anchored, and honestly evidenced. That is precisely what the hostile verification pass and provenance tags exist for. What would be unacceptable is a file with invented evidence — which is why every claim in ours is tagged with what it actually rests on.
What happens when the standards change?
That's the reason the Portfolio plan exists. The EN 18031 series carries live OJEU citation restrictions, CRA harmonised standards are being drafted at CEN/CENELEC right now, and radio standards revise on their own cycle. We watch the citations; when something changes, affected dossiers are flagged and regenerated, with the change recorded in each document's history.
Amazon asked me for compliance documents. Can you help before they delist?
Marketplace compliance requests (CE documentation, EPR registration numbers, GPSR responsible-person details) are a first-class use case — typically with a 30–90 day window before enforcement. The Portfolio plan tracks EPR registrations per country and produces marketplace-ready document packs.
Why should I trust this over a consultant?
You shouldn't trust either — you should read the file. Ours comes with a register you can recompute, provenance tags you can check, and a sample that openly fails its own product. If after reading it you'd rather pay €3,800 per SKU for a PDF you can't interrogate, that is a legitimate choice. We think most engineering-led brands will read both and decide quickly.

We onboard five brands per month during beta.

Connected-product brands with 5–300 SKUs selling into the EU. First assessment delivered within days of intake — priority to catalogues facing the 11 Sep 2026 CRA reporting date.

Received. We reply within two working days, from a person.

No newsletter. No "content". One reply, from a person.