Trust Security and governance
Clear the security review without losing the quarter.
The slowest part of an AI deployment is usually not the build, it is the review that clears it.
25+ years in enterprise IT, including Fortune 500 regulated-data environments.
- Least privilege
- Human approval
- Audit logging
No preparation needed. You leave with next steps in writing.
By hand, then governed
- 25+ yrs enterprise IT
- Fortune 500 regulated-data environments
- Founder-led
Where your data lives
Your review scope does not grow.
Inside your boundary
The accounts, the network, and the keys remain yours.
Access and permissioning
A mistake stays as small as the access that caused it.
-
What each agent can touch
Exactly what its job needs and nothing more.
-
How access is scoped
Per agent, per task, not per account.
-
What happens on a mistake
It stays a ticket rather than a disclosure.
Read the detail
The expensive version of an agent error is the one where a process holding broad standing credentials reaches a system nobody expected it to touch. Bounding the access is what bounds the cost of being wrong, and it is the difference between an incident that is a ticket and one that is a disclosure with legal and customers attached.
So each agent is scoped to exactly what its job needs and nothing more. Broad, standing access is not the default here. An agent that reads a reporting table cannot also reach into a payments system, because it was never granted that path.
- Permissions scoped per agent, per task, not per account.
- No standing admin access handed to automated processes.
- Access reviewed and tightened as roles change.
Human approval gates
Your people spend their hours only on the decisions that carry risk.
The mechanism is a gate.
How a governed agent runs
Audit and evidence
Answer the evidence request without pulling the team off the roadmap.
Audit and evidence
When a review comes, the record is already there.
Compliance posture
A straight answer now, including where the answer is no.
What costs a buyer time is not a gap. It is finding out about the gap late in diligence.
What we build to, and what we hold
| Framework | Certification or attestation held | What that means for your review |
|---|---|---|
| HIPAA Security Rule | No certification exists | There is no HIPAA certification to hold, for us or for anyone. Deployments are designed against the technical safeguards at 45 CFR 164.312: access control, audit controls, integrity, authentication, and transmission security. |
| AICPA Trust Services Criteria (SOC 2) | No | We hold no SOC 2 report, and SOC 2 is an attestation rather than a certificate in any case. We build toward the evidence a Type II asks for, in particular a complete, dated population of system actions across the observation period. |
| NIST AI Risk Management Framework | Non-certifiable framework | The framework is voluntary and non-certifiable, so nobody is certified against it. The governance work is structured around its four functions: govern, map, measure, and manage. |
| ISO/IEC 42001 | No | We are not certified against it. We align to its control structure. It certifies how an organization governs AI rather than whether a given model is safe or accurate. |
Where we act as a business associate on an engagement involving protected health information, we will execute a Business Associate Agreement before that data comes into scope.
A plain note on language: we describe how we run engagements, not badges we have not earned. IntellaGrow holds no security or AI certification today, is not a law firm or an auditor, and issues no certifications of its own. If a specific attestation matters to your decision, ask, and we will tell you exactly where things stand.
Security review questions
The questions your security team will open with.
Answered here so your reviewer can close half the questionnaire before the first call, and so the review starts from facts rather than from a form. Several of the answers are no, which is the point.
-
Where does our data live?
Inside your own cloud account, whether that is AWS, Azure, or GCP, in your VPC and inside the audit boundary your team already controls. The practical effect on your review is that its scope does not grow: no second copy of your records to protect, no new transfer for your privacy team to paper, and no vendor environment to assess. Your data does not leave your environment to reach us, and the accounts, the network, and the keys stay yours.
-
Is IntellaGrow SOC 2 certified?
No, and no organization is, because SOC 2 produces an attestation report from a licensed CPA firm rather than a certificate. IntellaGrow holds no SOC 2 report today and does not claim one. What the work produces instead is the artifact that costs you real money to be missing: a dated, retrievable population of the actions the system took across the whole observation window, which is what a Type II examination samples. An ungoverned AI deployment cannot hand an auditor that population, and if the record was never written there is nothing to sample and no way to buy it back afterwards.
-
Are you HIPAA compliant?
Compliance is a property of your whole program, assessed by the HHS Office for Civil Rights, and no vendor can self-declare it on your behalf. There is also no such thing as HIPAA certification. What you can hold us to is that a deployment is designed against the technical safeguards at 45 CFR 164.312: access control, audit controls, integrity, authentication, and transmission security. Your privacy officer reviews controls they already recognize rather than learning a new vendor model, and where we act as a business associate, we will execute a Business Associate Agreement before protected health information comes into scope. We hold none today because no engagement has yet required one.
-
How do you control what an AI agent can reach?
Scoping is what caps the cost of an agent being wrong, so each one gets exactly what its task needs and nothing standing. An agent that reads a reporting table has no route into a payments system, because that route was never issued. Where protected health information is involved this is also a regulatory requirement, not just good practice: the HIPAA minimum necessary standard at 45 CFR 164.502(b) limits access to what the purpose actually requires, which is the rule an agent handed a whole record for a three-field task has already broken.
-
What gets logged, and would an auditor accept it?
You get to answer an evidence request without a reconstruction project, because every action is recorded as it happens: what ran, on whose authority, against what data, and what it produced. The record is written before the result is returned to the calling system, so it exists even when the downstream workflow fails. Whether an auditor accepts it is their determination against their own scope and standard, and no vendor can promise that outcome. What we control is that the evidence exists, is dated, is complete for the period, and is retained under your rules in your environment.
-
Which frameworks do you build to, and which do you hold?
You get a direct answer now rather than a gap that surfaces late in diligence, when it costs a review cycle. We design against the HIPAA Security Rule, the AICPA Trust Services Criteria that a SOC 2 examination is conducted against, the NIST AI Risk Management Framework functions of govern, map, measure, and manage, and the ISO/IEC 42001 control structure for AI management systems. We hold no certification, attestation, or authorization against any of them, and we will not imply one. If a specific attestation decides your purchase, ask, and we will tell you exactly where things stand rather than where we would like them to be.
-
Who else touches our data?
Only the parties you approve, and you can see the whole list before you sign. The deployment runs on your cloud accounts and on the model providers you approve, chosen with you during the assessment rather than assumed. The vendors IntellaGrow uses to run its own business, such as hosting, forms, and email, are listed in full on the sub-processors page.
How we handle your data in an engagement
What you get, and the control behind it.
Six commitments that hold across every engagement, regulated or not.
| What you get | The control behind it |
|---|---|
| Your review scope does not grow | Agents run inside your AWS, Azure, or GCP environment. Your data stays in your accounts and is not copied out to ours, so there is no new vendor boundary for your team to assess. |
| A mistake stays contained | Every agent gets only the permissions its job requires, which caps what a wrong step can reach. We do not request broad or standing access by default. |
| Nothing risky runs unattended | Anything that touches sensitive data or sends external output waits for a person to approve it, so the authority stays with your team. |
| You can prove what happened | Actions are logged as they happen, so the evidence exists when your auditors, your legal team, or you ask for it, instead of being rebuilt under deadline. |
| Protected health data waits for the paperwork | Where we act as a business associate on an engagement that touches protected health information, we will execute a Business Associate Agreement before that data is in scope. We hold none today because no engagement has yet required one. |
| Your rules, not a template | We configure access, retention, and approval rules to your risk and compliance requirements, so your team is not arguing with someone else's defaults. |
The shortest path through the review is to start it now.
An intro call with the people who own the review costs twenty minutes and saves the round trips.
If AI is not the right tool for your problem, you will hear that from us.
Within one business dayYour scope is settled, in writing.
Just have a question? Call, text, chat, or send a note.