Sentink is secure multilingual AI research infrastructure for regulated teams—deployed on regional SaaS, tenant‑exclusive footprints, or private air‑gapped estates. Procurement rarely buys slide decks; it buys evidence. Here is how Sentink aligns with committee scrutiny: deliberate separation between ingestion, workspaces, persisted research data, AI routes, multilingual exports, automation seams (such as integrations you approve), and operations you can cite in security reviews.
The same core product adapts across hosting models—so you can graduate from cloud to sovereign or private installs without rewriting your research programs.
Predictable monthly tiers, shortest time‑to‑value, and hardened shared infrastructure—with strict logical isolation between tenants and regional hosting options documented in onboarding.
For teams that require dedicated network paths, quieter neighbors, or customer‑controlled network integration while still benefiting from Sentink‑operated automation.
Full separation: code runs entirely inside boundaries you attest. Ideal where model usage, egress, evidence exports, or national cloud rules disallow multi‑tenant SaaS.
Formal certifications are timelines, not vibes. Sentink aligns engineering and documentation practices toward SOC 2 Type II‑style attestations with a target roadmap discussed under NDA—and ISO 27001 alignment staged thereafter. Your RFP deserves dates and scope—not logos purchased before controls exist.
Regulated buyers evaluate LLM risk the same way they evaluate storage: who operates the plane, what can leave the boundary, and how AI evidence is retained. The table below summarizes how Sentink aligns those answers across common deployment postures—precise routing is confirmed in enterprise technical design and contracts.
| Footprint | Operator & trust boundary | AI / LLM routing | Default egress posture | Logs & integrations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sentink Cloud (regional SaaS) | Sentink operates the platform on dedicated-server tenancy with documented regional hosting options surfaced during contracting. | Model assistance may route via approved integrations/subprocessors you review; private-model postures are constrained by contract and onboarding design. | No “silent” egress story—allow lists, integration seams, and lawful export paths are enumerated instead of ad-hoc tunnels. | Operational monitoring suitable for SaaS SLAs; webhook/export/SIEM ingestion attach at documented seams per your security pack. |
| Dedicated / hybrid VPC-style | Tenant-exclusive infrastructure with quieter multi-tenant neighborhoods and customer-steered networking for sensitive programs. | Inference patterns align to VPC constraints; BYO endpoints and policy-driven routing are common discussion topics with your infra/security teams. | Private connectivity, IP allow lists, and negotiated egress controls—ideal when national cloud or sovereignty reviews run in parallel with pilots. | Ownership splits for patching/backups monitoring are explicit; bridges to corporate IdP and SOC pipelines are first-class. |
| Enterprise private / licensed | Workloads run entirely inside boundaries you attest—air-gapped workflows optional when regulators disallow shared SaaS inference. | BYO LLM / on-prem inference is the default posture; models stay inside your trust zone unless you intentionally bridge outbound paths. | Your security team owns outbound policy—Sentink aligns change management with your CAB and evidence exports land in archives you govern. | Retention, legal hold, and SIEM ingestion inherit your KMS/vault posture; forensic narratives stay inside your tooling. |
Multilingual RTL programs inherit the same access, workspace isolation, retention, export, and AI governance primitives—localized content expands the confidentiality surface area, which is why we pair language tooling with tenancy controls instead of treating “translations” as a cosmetic layer.
We describe Sentink using separation of concerns auditors recognize: identities terminate at controlled edges, workloads execute in an application tier, tenancy is enforced as a hard boundary, persisted artifacts live in bounded stores, and any model assistance is mediated—not bolted onto CRUD endpoints without policy.
Every enterprise survey vendor claims ‘multi‑tenant security’. Procurement teams should insist on specificity: namespaces, cryptographic boundaries, backups, restores, deletion programs, cross‑tenant test discipline, and what internal roles can theoretically touch tenant configuration.
AI should reduce time‑to‑insight—not create phantom data egress. Governance starts with minimizing prompts, forbidding unintended destinations, versioning prompt templates where applicable, retaining evidence of model usage proportional to risk, and giving humans review points before irrevocable outbound actions.
Retention is simultaneously a GDPR/PDPA topic and a board topic. Sentink supports policy conversations: minimum necessary storage, timelines for respondent artifacts, respondent deletion/export flows constrained by lawful bases, archival for litigation, and research integrity for longitudinal programs.
Modern access control is federation at the front door, fine roles inside the product, MFA expectations aligned with your IdP vendor, quarterly access reviews aided by telemetry, and immutable‑leaning audit logs suitable for SOC2‑style narratives—exact implementation matrices depend on your edition and footprint.
Committee buyers care what happens during failure modes: patching velocity, forensic logging continuity, escalation paths to your SOC, and contractual incident posture. Exact SLAs vary by SKU and geography; we articulate them in onboarding packs for enterprise footprints instead of implying one-size timelines on marketing copy.
Procurement-ready answers
These summaries mirror how we onboard enterprise committees; deeper CAIQ-style responses and datapath attestations arrive under your standard NDA and technical design milestones.
Sentink Enterprise
