top of page
grok-image-2f6afba2-cc3c-46b9-916c-5ad350ff9c01.png

Data residency isn't data sovereignty.

Can you prove — with cryptographic certainty — where your data lives and that no one has tampered with it?

A traditional EU cloud provider solves data residency — but the admin still has root access. The provider makes promises, not proofs. For regulated industries where "trust us" isn't good enough, that gap is the problem.

The Gap

Promises vs Proofs

Your EU-hosted AWS instance is still a US company subject to the CLOUD Act. Traditional cloud providers — AWS, Azure, Google Cloud — can be compelled to hand over data regardless of where it's hosted. Data residency tells you where data sits. Data sovereignty proves what happened to it.

​

European organisations are accelerating moves away from US providers. But replacing one cloud provider with another still leaves you with promises. The question regulators are increasingly asking isn't "where is the data?" — it's "can you prove what happened to it?"

grok-image-03322404-d3a1-40cf-a90f-d838c20b9e6d.png
grok-image-9675d19e-bd29-4363-a502-da9b79403ac6.png

Aikin's Approach

Hybrid Architecture: Proof Where It Matters

Aikin architects the hybrid split: ICP for workloads that need cryptographic proof (tamper-proof state, verifiable compute, jurisdiction-locking), and Cyso (Netherlands) for standard EU cloud workloads (performance, cost efficiency, existing system integration).

Off-chain infrastructure is Dutch (Cyso). On-chain infrastructure is decentralised (ICP). No US jurisdiction over either layer. No big-bang migration — phased architecture, right things first.

​

  • Cryptographic proof of data location and integrity

  • Tamper-proof state on ICP's sovereign cloud

  • EU cloud (Cyso, Netherlands) for standard workloads

  • Entirely outside US jurisdiction

  • Phased migration — prove the model, then expand

Built for Regulated Industries

  • Regulated Enterprises (FinTech, HealthTech) — CLOUD Act exposure, data sovereignty pressure, 30-50% IT budget on infrastructure maintenance

  • Industry 4.0 / Manufacturing — Manufacturing IP sovereignty, NIS2 compliance, AI training data jurisdiction

  • Government & Public Sector — Strict sovereignty mandates, tamper-proof audit trails

  • Legal & Professional Services — Client confidentiality, tamper-proof record-keeping

How We Work Together

  1. Architecture Assessment — Which workloads need verifiable infrastructure vs standard cloud?

  2. Hybrid Design — ICP for sovereignty, Cyso for the rest. Detailed architecture with clear tradeoffs.

  3. Pilot Solution — Do the right things first. Prove the plan works.

  4. Full Solution — Expand once the architecture is validated.

Assess your sovereignty gap

Start with an architecture assessment — which of your workloads need verifiable infrastructure?

bottom of page