GDPR-compliant AI
AI Your Data Protection Officer Can Approve
Most AI tools stall in review because nobody can answer four simple questions. MATE answers all four, in writing.
Where AI approvals get stuck
A privacy review is not looking for a badge on a website. It needs answers it can write down and defend. With most assistants those answers are hard to get, which is why so many pilots sit unapproved for months.
Does it learn from our data?
If the tool trains on what your staff type, a client name or a patient note becomes part of a model. Nobody has worked out how to take it back out.
Where does the data go?
You cannot sign off what you cannot describe. That means knowing which country the work happens in and who else touches it on the way.
Is there an agreement?
You need it in writing before the pilot, not after. Getting a straight answer from a large provider often takes longer than the pilot itself.
Can you prove it later?
Being careful is not enough. You have to be able to show it, and a reassurance from a sales call is worth nothing in an audit.
Four short answers
All of them published rather than promised in a meeting, so your assessment can point at a document.
- Never used to train a model
- Processed in Switzerland, on hardware we own
- Nothing kept once the answer is delivered
- Every claim written down and public
- Can run inside your own building if needed
What that saves you
The clause that stops most rollouts
With MATE there is nothing to negotiate. What your team types is never used for training, so no draft contract and no patient note ends up inside a model that cannot be cleaned.
Nothing left lying around
Conversation content is gone once the answer is delivered. That alone removes most of what a review has to describe, assess and document.
A short agreement, not a long one
You still want a contract covering data handled on your behalf. It simply has far less to cover here, because nothing is kept and there is no training purpose to argue about.
Or nothing to cover at all
In On-device Mode the work never leaves the employee's device. Nothing reaches us, so there is nothing for anyone to govern.
Data requests answered in a paragraph
Someone asks what you hold about them. For their MATE conversations the honest answer is nothing, because none was kept. What is usually a week of searching becomes one sentence.
A much shorter risk assessment
Most AI rollouts need one in writing. Fewer data flows and no training purpose means fewer things to describe and fewer risks to weigh, which is days of work rather than weeks.
The new European AI rules, handled
They now apply to companies using AI, not only to those building it. People have to know when they are talking to a machine, and staff need basic training. One tool with one set of instructions makes that manageable.
The single most effective step
Move people off personal AI accounts. It is the least glamorous item here and the one that changes the most: an invisible data flow becomes one you can put a contract around.
Ask us before you decide
Send the questions your review actually has. We would rather answer them in writing than have anyone approve a tool on a marketing claim.