Legal & Professional
Privilege is not a risk most firms are willing to test on a shared endpoint.
The exposure in professional services is asymmetric. The efficiency gain from AI is large and the downside of a privilege or confidentiality failure is existential, which is why adoption stalls at the policy stage.
A dedicated environment with contractual no-retention, client-matter segregation and a full access log changes what the risk committee is being asked to approve.
The data in question
| Category | Typical material | Why it cannot go to a public endpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Client matter | Advice, correspondence, work product | Privileged; third-party processing creates avoidable risk |
| Transaction | Deal documents, diligence materials, data rooms | Confidentiality undertakings restricting processing |
| Litigation | Pleadings, discovery, expert material | Protective orders limiting handling and location |
| Firm | Conflicts, billing, internal records | Confidential and frequently regulated |
What usually blocks the project
- Client outside counsel guidelines that prohibit third-party processing of matter data.
- Protective orders with explicit handling and location restrictions.
- Professional conduct obligations on confidentiality that firms will not risk-weight.
- Client-matter segregation requirements that a shared index cannot satisfy.
Where customers start
Diligence review
Large document sets reviewed in an environment your client can be told about.
Contract abstraction
Consistent extraction with a reviewable evaluation record.
Knowledge retrieval
Firm knowledge made searchable with matter-level segregation enforced.
Start with one workflow.
Send us a representative document set and the constraint. We will size it, evaluate it, and be straight with you about fit.