Skip to content
SECURITY & SOVEREIGNTY

Decided in the architecture, not in a policy page

Where client records live, who can lawfully compel them, and whether a decision can be reconstructed years later are engineering choices. We made them before the first feature shipped.

THE STANDARD WE HOLD

A professional should be able to explain our security to a client without taking our word for it.

FOREIGN REQUEST
RESIDENT IN CANADA
Resident in Canada
DATA RESIDENCY · CANADA
NOT USED
Foreign tools
Foreign hosting
Foreign
Client ledgers
Engagement files
Approval history
Canada CentralACTIVE
ENCRYPTED AT REST AND IN TRANSIT
WHO IS ASKING
SCOPED PER ENGAGEMENT
Scoped access
ENGAGEMENT · NOVA TECH INC.FY 2025
Engagement partnerFULL ACCESS
Preparer on fileSCOPED
Colleague, other clientNO ACCESS
External partyNO ACCESS
PRIVILEGE BOUNDARIES HOLD IN SOFTWARE
A POSITION QUESTIONED
RECONSTRUCTED
Reconstructable history
Why was this coded to GIFI 2780?
Suggested by TaxClever09:38
Matched a shareholder advance · 94%
Reviewed · M. Okafor, CPA09:40
Opened the flagged transaction
Approved · J. Ha, CPA09:41
Coded 2780, flagged for s. 15(2)
NAMED · TIMESTAMPED · RETAINED

The questions a client will ask you

And the answer you can give without checking with us.

Where exactly does my data sit?

In Canadian regions, and it does not leave them for processing.

Could a foreign authority compel it?

The records are held under Canadian jurisdiction by design.

Who inside the firm can open my file?

Only the people scoped to that engagement, and access is logged.

If the CRA questions a position, can you explain it?

Every suggestion, approval and edit is on the record with a name and a date.

Four commitments in the build

Each one is a constraint we accepted, not a setting a customer configures.

01

Canadian residency

Built and hosted on Canadian infrastructure. Client records stay under Canadian jurisdiction, with no cross-border processing.

02

Encrypted, then scoped

Encrypted in transit and at rest, with access bounded per engagement so professional and privilege boundaries hold inside the software.

03

Citation as a requirement

No automated conclusion ships without its source. An unsourced answer is treated as a defect in the system, not a limitation of AI.

04

Reconstructable history

Every suggestion, approval and edit is logged against a named user, so a position taken today can be explained years from now.

A professional signs off: nothing reaches a client file without a named person approving it, and that approval travels with the file for as long as it exists.

Sovereignty is not a feature we added. It is the reason the system is shaped this way.

Retrofitting residency, scoping or an audit trail is far harder than building on them. So we started there.

Bring us your security review

Send the questionnaire your firm or your client uses. We would rather answer it in detail than summarise it here.

Contact the team