From RedNote to Red Flags: Why CIOs Are Cautious About Chinese Open LLMs

Reading Time: 8 minutes

Prefer watching instead of reading? Watch the video here. Prefer reading instead? Scroll down for the full text. Prefer listening instead? Scroll up for the audio player.

P.S. The video and audio are in sync, so you can switch between them or control playback as needed. Enjoy Greyhound Standpoint insights in the format that suits you best. Join the conversation on social media using #GreyhoundStandpoint.

---

Chinese social media platform RedNote has released its first open-source large language model, dubbed “dots.llm1,” joining a growing wave of Chinese technology companies pursuing open-source AI strategies that challenge Western proprietary models.

“Chinese firms like RedNote are deploying open-source LLMs not just as models but as instruments of ecosystem control and geopolitical leverage. Meanwhile, Western firms such as OpenAI and Google remain committed to proprietary architectures,” said Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst and CEO at Greyhound Research. “This is no longer a tactical split in model licensing — it’s a structural divergence in trust frameworks, one that will define the next generation of enterprise AI procurement.”

The split goes deeper than technology choices. “Western AI leaders are optimizing for shareholder return, compliance insulation, and platform lock-in through closed API-delivered models. In contrast, Chinese vendors like RedNote and DeepSeek are aggressively open-sourcing to expand national influence, cultivate developer mindshare, and drive localization-led adoption,” Gogia explained.

“RedNote’s dots.LLM1 is less a revenue product and more a market accelerant,” Gogia explained. “The open-source model isn’t a broken business plan — it’s a strategic play to become foundational infrastructure across sovereign cloud ecosystems and public developer communities. The long game is not monetization through licensing but platform entrenchment through adoption.”

This approach is enabled by structural advantages. “Chinese firms benefit from central government subsidies, national procurement incentives, and policy exemptions that support loss-leader behavior in the short term. What might be financially unsustainable in the West becomes strategically viable in China due to alignment with state AI priorities,” Gogia said.

“The core trade-off for enterprise buyers is no longer just cost versus performance — it is transparency versus control,” Gogia noted. “Controlled open LLMs provide a bridge across this chasm, giving CIOs and CISOs the ability to audit, customize, and self-host AI models without being beholden to proprietary ecosystems. However, the burden of governance shifts inward — enterprises must build their own trust scaffolding to make openness production-grade.”

The geopolitical dimension adds another layer of complexity. “Chinese open-weight models like dots.llm1 may be technically transparent—but in the eyes of global enterprises, transparency is no substitute for trust. Especially in regulated industries — banking, healthcare, and defense — geopolitical risk is now baked into AI architecture decisions,” Gogia warned.

As quoted in ComputerWorld.com, in an article authored by Gyana Swain published on June 10, 2025.

Beyond the Media Quote: Our View, In Full

Pressed for time? You can focus solely on the Greyhound Flashpoints that follow. Each one distills the full analysis into a sharp, executive-ready takeaway — combining our official Standpoint, validated through Pulse data from ongoing CXO trackers, and grounded in Fieldnotes from real-world advisory engagements.

East vs. West—A Strategic Fork in the Future of Enterprise AI Models

Greyhound Flashpoint – Chinese firms like RedNote are deploying open-source LLMs not just as models but as instruments of ecosystem control and geopolitical leverage. Meanwhile, Western firms such as OpenAI and Google remain committed to proprietary architectures. Per Greyhound CIO Pulse 2025, 54% of Fortune 500 CIOs are actively evaluating controlled open LLMs—a term Greyhound Research has coined to describe open-weight models governed by enterprise-grade compliance, auditability, and deployment sovereignty. This is no longer a tactical split in model licensing—it’s a structural divergence in trust frameworks, one that will define the next generation of enterprise AI procurement.

Greyhound Standpoint – According to Greyhound Research, this divergence is not merely a question of technology openness but one of strategic ideology. Western AI leaders are optimizing for shareholder return, compliance insulation, and platform lock-in through closed API-delivered models. In contrast, Chinese vendors like RedNote and DeepSeek are aggressively open-sourcing to expand national influence, cultivate developer mindshare, and drive localization-led adoption.

The core trade-off for enterprise buyers is no longer just cost versus performance—it is transparency versus control. Controlled open LLMs provide a bridge across this chasm, giving CIOs and CISOs the ability to audit, customize, and self-host AI models without being beholden to proprietary ecosystems. However, the burden of governance shifts inward—enterprises must build their own trust scaffolding to make openness production-grade.

This is not simply a technology release strategy—it is a diplomatic vector. For Chinese vendors, open-source LLMs serve as soft power tools, exporting not only code but also embedded ideologies and governance frameworks into markets across Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In emerging economies, these open models can become default standards—embedding China’s AI worldview by default.

Greyhound Pulse – Per Greyhound CIO Pulse 2025, 61% of global CIOs favor open or partially open LLMs for at least one enterprise use case. Within that cohort, 44% cite auditability as the primary driver—particularly in use cases like knowledge management, multilingual chatbots, and policy summarization. However, only 27% of North American CIOs expressed trust in Chinese-origin open models, citing unresolved issues around contributor transparency, censorship-aligned fine-tuning, and lack of jurisdictional recourse.

This split is most visible in the growing demand for third-party validation layers, model provenance registries, and fine-tuning under local policy alignment. More CIOs are requiring independent third-party model attestations as a baseline for enterprise acceptance. These include audits of training data lineage, contributor identity, and embedded system behaviors—especially in heavily regulated sectors like BFSI and healthcare.

Greyhound Fieldnote – Per a recent Greyhound Fieldnote involving a Southeast Asian telecommunications provider, the CTO team adopted an open Chinese LLM to automate multilingual response generation across Tier-1 support channels. Initial results were positive—the model offered low-latency inference and matched accuracy benchmarks. However, deeper evaluation revealed politically evasive outputs and silent failures on queries involving sensitive geographies. An internal audit flagged these as alignment artifacts from training protocols designed to comply with local censorship laws. The deployment was ultimately segmented—retained in a sandbox for internal use but decoupled from customer-facing systems.

The enterprise explored whether it could fine-tune the model to override embedded ideological alignment, drawing on precedents like DeepSeek’s “R1 1776”—a community-led fork designed to strip censorship patterns. This underscores one of the unique strengths of open LLMs: unlike proprietary models, they can be corrected, not just consumed.

RedNote’s Open Model—Business Viability or Ecosystem Land Grab?

Greyhound Flashpoint – RedNote’s dots. LLM1 is less a revenue product and more a market accelerant. Its release continues a pattern seen across Chinese LLM developers—DeepSeek, Qwen, and Baichuan among them—who use open-weight models as first-touch engagement mechanisms. Per Greyhound Sector Pulse 2025, only 27% of these firms currently monetize through recurring commercial contracts. The open-source model isn’t a broken business plan—it’s a strategic play to become foundational infrastructure across sovereign cloud ecosystems and public developer communities. The long game is not monetization through licensing but platform entrenchment through adoption.

Greyhound Standpoint – According to Greyhound Research, RedNote’s decision to open-source its LLM is emblematic of China’s AI playbook: dominate through diffusion. In contrast to the Western emphasis on monetizing the model directly—via API consumption, fine-tuning fees, or hosted deployments—Chinese firms are playing an ecosystem game. They aim to be the model of record in academic research, state-backed deployments, and budget-constrained innovation zones across Asia, Africa, and the Middle East.

The open core serves as a gateway. From there, monetization is layered atop via cloud infrastructure, domain-specific fine-tuning, and vertical SaaS wrappers. However, this model demands deep investor patience, regulatory scaffolding, and geopolitical insulation—all of which are state-supported in China but difficult to replicate elsewhere.

One of the biggest enablers of this strategy is structural: Chinese firms benefit from central government subsidies, national procurement incentives, and policy exemptions that support loss-leader behavior in the short term. What might be financially unsustainable in the West becomes strategically viable in China due to alignment with state AI priorities.

Greyhound Pulse – Greyhound Sector Pulse 2025 finds that while 63% of Chinese mid-market enterprises have trialed open-source LLMs in internal workflows, less than 1 in 5 transitioned to production. The key hurdles cited were absence of commercial support, poor documentation, and lack of alignment tooling. Notably, 42% of enterprise buyers now expect SLA-grade support even for open-weight deployments—suggesting that the community goodwill earned through openness must be matched by operational assurance.

The most successful Chinese AI firms are now shifting from model-centric to platform-centric business models. By embedding open models into cloud stacks and AI-as-a-service offerings, they build long-term dependency loops that can later be monetized through infrastructure, custom tuning, and deployment-specific extensions.

Greyhound Fieldnote – Per a recent Greyhound Fieldnote, with a European logistics software firm expanding into Southeast Asia, a notable Chinese LLM was shortlisted for a low-latency, multilingual document classification project. The technical fit was promising—model weights were transparent, cost per token was favorable, and early benchmarks met target KPIs. However, midway through evaluation, the CISO flagged gaps in contributor provenance, release cadence, and cryptographic verifiability of updates. With no SLA and no contractual support channel, the risk profile was deemed untenable for production.

Enterprise Risk and Regulatory Filters in Evaluating Chinese AI Models

Greyhound Flashpoint – Chinese open-weight models like dots.llm1 may be technically transparent—but in the eyes of global enterprises, transparency is no substitute for trust. Per Greyhound CIO Pulse 2025, 73% of Fortune 500 CIOs now evaluate model provenance, contributor location, and ideological alignment as part of procurement diligence. Especially in regulated industries—banking, healthcare, and defense—geopolitical risk is now baked into AI architecture decisions. For vendors like RedNote, the challenge is not only performance—it’s establishing that openness can be paired with verifiable governance. Without that, adoption will remain peripheral at best and flagged at worst.

Greyhound Standpoint – According to Greyhound Research, the decision to deploy a Chinese-origin LLM is no longer a technical one—it’s a sovereign and strategic decision layered with compliance, optics, and operational fragility. Open source does not guarantee safety. Even publicly released weights can carry ideological training bias, censorship-aligned filters, and unverifiable contributor chains. For this reason, controlled open LLMs—open-weight models paired with internal validation tooling, SBOMs, and runtime isolation—are the only viable route forward for global enterprises.

In multiple client engagements, we’ve observed that even when a Chinese model passes technical muster, the optics of approving it within a Western enterprise can trigger board-level scrutiny or external reputational risk. In some cases, enterprises have excluded Chinese LLMs purely based on national origin—regardless of functionality or security hygiene.

Greyhound Pulse – Per CIO Pulse 2025, 68% of global security heads in regulated industries disqualify LLMs with unverifiable geopolitical provenance—even if the model is open source. Only 19% of firms surveyed reported a willingness to deploy Chinese-origin models even in sandboxed use cases, and those that did often used them under strict containment protocols.

Greyhound Fieldnote – Per a recent Greyhound Fieldnote with a global pharma major operating in APAC and EMEA, a notable Chinese LLM was evaluated for internal summarization of multilingual R&D abstracts. While the model met linguistic requirements, internal legal flagged its upstream commit chain as unverifiable and lacking contributor documentation. Furthermore, the team uncovered topic-level hallucinations that aligned with state narratives on sensitive geopolitical events.

Copyright Policy. All content contained on the Greyhound Research website is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published, or broadcast without the prior written permission of Greyhound Research or, in the case of third-party materials, the prior written consent of the copyright owner of that content. You may not alter, delete, obscure, or conceal any trademark, copyright, or other notice appearing in any Greyhound Research content. We request our readers not to copy Greyhound Research content and not republish or redistribute them (in whole or partially) via emails or republishing them in any media, including websites, newsletters, or intranets. We understand that you may want to share this content with others, so we’ve added tools under each content piece that allow you to share the content. If you have any questions, please get in touch with our Community Relations Team at connect@thofgr.com.