Financial & Insurance
Processing rules your public endpoint cannot satisfy, met by architecture rather than by policy language.
Underwriting files, claims histories and client identifiers sit under processing, retention and residency rules that a shared endpoint is structurally unable to meet — regardless of what its terms of service say.
Strata's answer is dedicated hardware, contractual no-retention with certified destruction, and an access log that lands in your own security information and event management system.
The data in question
| Category | Typical material | Why it cannot go to a public endpoint |
|---|---|---|
| Underwriting | Submissions, risk files, pricing models | Client-identifiable and commercially sensitive |
| Claims | Claim files, adjuster notes, medical and loss detail | Personal data under strict processing and retention rules |
| Client | Identifiers, holdings, correspondence | Regulatory residency and confidentiality obligations |
| Model risk | Internal models and validation documentation | Governance requirements on where and how models are run |
What usually blocks the project
- Retention rules that a metered public endpoint cannot evidence compliance with.
- Subprocessor change rights that vendors reserve and regulators do not accept.
- Residency requirements that a region label in a console does not satisfy.
- Model risk governance that requires a pinned, documented, reproducible model version.
Where customers start
Submission triage
First-pass review and classification inside your own tenancy.
Claims summarisation
Consistent, auditable summarisation with a pinned model version.
Document review
Large-corpus review where the corpus cannot leave your control.
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.