Detection
Names, company names, addresses, social insurance numbers, IBANs, dates of birth, case and contract references, across PDF, Word and Excel files.
Software that runs on your machine, with the network off, strips identifying data from a document, then puts the real names back on the text returned by the tool you chose.
Status : In preparation. First product of the programme, headed for testing with partner firms. Sheet updated 11 September 2026.
Professional secrecy is not suspended by a technical novelty. Sending an identifiable document to a generative service amounts to disclosing it to a third party. The Swiss Bar Association guidelines on the use of artificial intelligence say so plainly.
Jurisdiction compounds it. A United States company remains subject to the CLOUD Act, which lets US authorities compel access to data it holds, including data stored in Europe. Where the server sits does not settle the question. Who owns it does.
The outcome on the ground is familiar. Either the firm gives up the tool and loses the time others are gaining, or it uses the tool and hopes the question is never asked.
All processing happens locally. That is an architectural constraint rather than a setting, and it is what makes the claim verifiable by the person buying it.
Names, company names, addresses, social insurance numbers, IBANs, dates of birth, case and contract references, across PDF, Word and Excel files.
Each entity gets one consistent token throughout the document. The text stays coherent, which matters if a model is to reason over it rather than trip on gaps.
It stays on the machine and never travels with the document. It is what lets the real names go back onto the text the external tool returns.
Everything the software touched is highlighted, and everything it could not classify is counted. Nothing is exported without a person looking at it.
Which document, when, how many entities, by which user. The log stays on the machine and exports for an internal review.
Detection in French, German and Italian, including the date formats and proper-noun forms that differ from one region to the next.
Platforms
Perfect automatic redaction does not exist. A false negative is a leak, and we would rather write that on the sheet than bury it in a clause.
The whole architecture follows from that: the machine proposes, the person decides.
Yes, and that is the first demonstration we give. Cut the network, process a document, the result is identical. You verify it yourself rather than take our word for it.
It stays in the document, which is why export requires review. The software highlights what it handled and counts what it set aside, so the zone of doubt is visible rather than hidden.
Yes. Redaction is independent of whatever comes next. That is its main point: it makes usable what the firm has already chosen, without forcing a change.
Early access goes to organisations willing to be involved in getting it right. Tell us which one concerns you and what you do instead today.
Write to us