Consent & purpose management
Purpose limitation is easy to state and hard to prove, because consent lives in one system while the data flows through many others, and checking at the moment of use is difficult to operationalize. This records what each dataset may be used for, including the consent terms and legal basis behind it, and checks every use against that record before access happens. It is how you answer GDPR and EU AI Act questions from a sealed record rather than reconstructing the position after the fact.
Purposes and legal bases are recorded per dataset, imported from your systems as claims that are checked against evidence. Claims never stand as truth on their own.
Every access request declares a purpose, and it is checked against the record before the grant goes through, all via one decision door.
Purpose limits travel with lineage, so a model trained on data collected for servicing surfaces a conflict before it becomes an exam finding.
Withdrawals propagate: when a customer withdraws consent, every dependent use surfaces as an issue that must be resolved with evidence, and no one can close it by assertion.
A sealed history of every purpose decision means you can show the legal basis for any processing at the time it ran.
Record
Consent terms and legal bases are captured against datasets as evidence-backed claims.
Check
Each use is evaluated against the recorded purpose before access, and a mismatch fails closed.
Propagate
Purpose restrictions follow lineage, so downstream uses inherit them.
Seal
Every check and decision is sealed on the hash-chained ledger.
“Do we actually have consent to use this data for marketing?”
The dataset's recorded purposes and legal bases answer that directly, and every access request declaring a marketing purpose is checked against that record before the grant goes through. A mismatch fails closed, so the use simply does not proceed without a basis to support it.
“This customer withdrew consent, so where is their data still in use?”
Withdrawals propagate along lineage, so every dependent use surfaces as an issue that must be resolved with evidence. You see the full set of affected uses immediately, and none of them can be closed by assertion.
“What was our legal basis for this processing at the time it ran?”
Every purpose check and decision is sealed on the hash-chained ledger, so the legal basis in force at the moment of processing is preserved as a record. You can produce it for any run without reconstruction.
Start with proof, not a promise.
There are three ways in, and each one earns the next. You approve the exit criteria before we spend any more of your time or budget.
A 60-minute working session
Bring one report that is expensive to prove. We walk the mechanism against it. Nothing is required from your side.
A two-week guided sandbox
Your team works hands-on against a synthetic sample bank. It requires zero access to your systems and zero procurement.
A six-week proof on your systems
We use read-only metadata across five systems and one priority report, scored against criteria both sides sign first. The decision it produces is yours.