Trusted by design
Security is what we settle first.
For most AI projects the security review comes at the end, when the architecture is already fixed. We settle the same questions before we design, because by then the answers are cheap.
How we design for trust.
Most AI projects stall at the security review, often for good reason. What reaches the model, what the system can do on its own, who approves consequential actions, and what evidence remains. We would rather answer those in the first conversation than the last.
Least authority, by default
An agent gets the narrowest set of operations its task requires, scoped to specific systems and records, never a broad integration account.
A person owns consequential decisions
Actions that commit money or change customer records are proposed with their evidence and released by someone accountable.
Evidence for every action
What the system read, proposed, who approved it and what changed is recorded, so the work can be explained afterwards, including to an auditor.
Requirements before architecture
Data classification, residency, retention and oversight are settled with your teams before we design, not retrofitted after a pilot.
The shortcut, and what we do instead.
Four decisions where AI projects usually take the quick path. Each one is cheap now and expensive later.
- Access
The usual shortcut
One integration account with broad permissions.Our decisionAuthority scoped per operation, to named systems and records.
- Approval
The usual shortcut
Autonomy switched on globally, reviewed later.Our decisionA person releases anything that commits the organisation.
- Evidence
The usual shortcut
Reconstructed from logs when someone finally asks.Our decisionRecorded as part of the work, ready for an audit.
- Requirements
The usual shortcut
Security review at the end, as a gate to pass.Our decisionData, residency and oversight agreed before we design.
Why we settle it first
Security is not a gate at the end. It is the design.
Every AI project reaches a review where someone asks what the system can do on its own. Answering that late means rebuilding. Answering it first means the architecture already holds.
Decided, not inherited
What a system may do is a deliberate choice per operation, never whatever an integration account happens to allow.
Reviewable by a person
Consequential work arrives with its evidence, so the accountable person can actually check it rather than approve blind.
Explainable afterwards
What happened is recorded as part of the work, which is what makes an audit a retrieval rather than an investigation.
More security topics.The risks, the controls, the rules.
AI risk
Autonomy is both the value and the exposure. The five failure modes we design against, and what each means for software acting inside your business.
How we build it
What a solution may do, who releases consequential work, and what evidence remains.
Data and compliance
EU processing, no training on your data, and GDPR handling written into the agreement.
Where does AI need to be trustworthy in your business?
Bring the workflow, the data it touches and the oversight it needs. We will work through the requirements with you.