Governance

Built for the security review

Classification, encryption, redaction, and audit are enforced by the runtime rather than left to each connector author to remember. Below is what the system does today, followed by exactly where each compliance programme stands.

Data classification

Every tool parameter is tagged

Connectors mark inputs, outputs, and logs as one of three tiers. The tag lives in the schema, so redaction behaviour follows the data instead of depending on the caller.

[STANDARD]

Operational

Non-sensitive identifiers: issue keys, channel names, status codes, latencies.

Logged in full
[PII: REDACTED]

Identifiable

Names, email addresses, message bodies, CRM contacts. Masked or hashed before telemetry leaves the process.

Redacted in logs
[PHI: ENCRYPTED]

Health data

Protected health information under HIPAA. Encrypted under dedicated key material and never written to a log in plaintext.

Zero plaintext in logs
Controls

What the system enforces

Envelope encryption

OAuth tokens, refresh secrets, and API keys are encrypted before they are written. Cloud uses AWS KMS with AES-256-GCM. Self-hosted deployments use local SDK keyrings under the same envelope pattern. Plaintext exists in memory for the duration of a single tool call.

Sanitized observability

Executions emit duration, tool identifier, tenant, and status. Values carrying a PII or PHI classification are redacted, masked, or hashed before any log, trace, or metric is written, so an agent cannot push a patient record into your logging vendor by accident.

Tamper-evident audit

Credential access, token rotation, permission changes, and tool executions produce audit records designed to be verifiable after the fact. This is what lets you answer which agent reached which system, acting for which user, and when.

Right to erasure

Credentials, connection bindings, and execution traces can be purged for a single subject, which is what GDPR and CCPA requests actually require. Cryptographic shredding of branch keys is the intended deletion mechanism rather than a best-effort row delete.

Certification status

Where each programme actually stands

Designing against a framework is not the same as being certified against it, and we would rather you learn the difference here than in procurement.

ProgrammeStatusDetail
SOC 2 Type IIControls designed, audit not startedBuilt against the Security, Availability, and Confidentiality criteria. We are not certified and do not have a report to share.
HIPAAPHI handling in the runtime, no BAA offeredPHI classification, envelope encryption, and log redaction are in the product so a BAA can be offered later without redesigning it. We will not sign one today.
GDPRErasure and residency paths in the architectureSelf-hosting keeps personal data entirely inside your own infrastructure, which is the strongest answer we can give while the cloud programme is incomplete.
CCPADeletion and disclosure paths in the architectureThe same subject-scoped erasure path covers CCPA deletion requests against credentials and execution traces.
Questions

Straight answers

No. The controls are designed against the Security, Availability, and Confidentiality criteria, and the audit has not been run. If a report is a hard requirement for your purchase today, self-hosting is the honest answer, because then the controls in scope are your own.

Send this page to your security team. Then request access.