Different problems. The same five questions underneath.
Most organizations arrive with one acute problem — a residency mandate, a ransomware scare, a renewal they can't walk away from. Each one is really a pillar of sovereignty in disguise, and the same architecture answers all five.
Data sovereignty
Prove where your data lives instead of asserting it — and make sure no single jurisdiction can compel a complete copy.
Explore → Pillars 01 & 04 — Security · PortabilityMulti-cloud storage
No provider holds enough to read your data, and none of them can hold you hostage at renewal.
Explore → Pillar 01 — SecurityRansomware protection
A backup target no attacker can encrypt, exfiltrate or destroy — because breaching any one provider gets them nothing readable.
Explore →Why one architecture answers all five
These solutions are not separate products. They are three faces of the same underlying architecture — and between them they answer all five pillars: client-side encryption, multi-cloud Reed-Solomon RAID, and jurisdictional policy enforcement. The same encrypt-encode-scatter pipeline that delivers data sovereignty also delivers multi-cloud durability and ransomware resilience — because each is a consequence of the same topology.
The shared architectural primitive
Every file is encrypted on the client with a per-file unique data-encryption key. The DEK is wrapped by a User Master Key the server never holds in unwrapped form. The encrypted file is framed into ~5 MB chunks. Each frame is Reed-Solomon RS(5,2) encoded into shards — seven at the RS(5,2) baseline, five data and two parity. Shards distribute across as many providers in customer-chosen jurisdictions.
From this single primitive, the three solution properties follow:
- Data sovereignty — because shards span multiple jurisdictions, no single jurisdiction's legal process can compel a complete file.
- Multi-cloud storage — because shards span multiple providers, no single provider's outage, breach, or hostile action affects availability.
- Ransomware protection — because shards span multiple providers, attackers cannot encrypt or destroy the backup target without compromising at least five distinct providers simultaneously.
How most organizations adopt these solutions
The typical adoption pattern is: solve the most acute problem first (often ransomware resilience or specific regulatory residency), then realize the others come along for free. Customers rarely "implement multi-cloud storage" as a project — they implement ransomware protection or PIPEDA compliance, and the multi-cloud topology emerges from the architecture.
This makes the migration calculus straightforward: pick the use case with the strongest current driver, retarget that workload, and the other properties activate automatically. There is no separate "now also enable multi-cloud RAID" configuration step because the substrate is the same.
Not sure which solution fits?
Most regulated organizations need all five pillars, whether or not they've named them yet. Book a briefing — we'll map the architecture to your specific exposure.