Security & Data Sovereignty

The End of Trust-Based AI Privacy

The End of Trust-Based AI Privacy

Standard cloud AI platforms operate on a “Policy-First” model. They require counsel to trust that data is not shared, not trained upon, and kept confidential. In high-stakes litigation, trust is a liability. After United States v. Heppner (S.D.N.Y. 2026), trust-based privacy is no longer a defensible standard for privileged communications.

The Heppner Precedent

The Heppner Precedent: A Question of First Impression

In Heppner, the court ruled that exchanges with generative AI platforms were not protected by attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. The court’s reasoning was categorical: by consenting to standard privacy policies — which allow for data collection, model training, and disclosure to regulatory authorities — the defendant had no “reasonable expectation of confidentiality.”

The court found that because standard AI providers reserve the right to access and disclose user inputs, the privilege is vitiated the moment the “Send” button is clicked.

Two-Tier Architecture

Two-Tier Architecture

Plaintiff Zero provides a dual-infrastructure approach to balance performance and sovereignty.

Public Mode. Utilize leading public models for maximum capability on non-sensitive work, research, and public filings.

Sovereign Shield. Activate for matters requiring cryptographic confidentiality.

Both modes deliver the same tools, research pipeline, and verification engine. The difference is the underlying infrastructure.

Technical Architecture

Sovereign Shield: Technical Architecture

Sovereign Shield replaces “Privacy Policies” with mathematical proof.

Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs). All AI processing occurs within encrypted hardware enclaves. Data is invisible to the cloud provider, invisible to us, and invisible to third parties.

Cryptographic Attestation. Sovereign Shield provides a hardware-level proof that the processing environment is secure. This is an immutable digital signature verified by the hardware manufacturer.

PCR Hash Verification. Platform Configuration Registers (PCR) confirm the exact version of the code running inside the enclave. We provide cryptographic proof that the system has not been modified to log, store, or intercept your data.

Zero Data Retention (ZDR). Confidentiality is enforced by the hardware architecture. Data exists only in volatile memory during the inference call and is permanently purged the millisecond the result is delivered.

Kovel-Grade Isolation

Kovel-Grade Isolation

Standard platforms “automatically de-link” data for training, but as Heppner proved, the mere technical ability to access data vitiates the privilege. Sovereign Shield is architected so that access is a physical impossibility.

Zero Model Training. Your work product, strategy, and evidence never enter a training set.

No Human-in-the-Loop. Unlike standard “Enterprise” tiers that allow for human “safety reviews” of flagged content, Sovereign Shield’s enclaves prevent all human access — including our own engineers.

Kovel-Agent Status. By using counsel-directed, hardware-isolated infrastructure, your use of AI functions as a “highly trained agent” of the firm, maintaining the zone of “full and frank communication” required for effective representation.

Infrastructure & Compliance

Infrastructure & Compliance

While Sovereign Shield provides the primary defense for privileged data, our entire platform is built on enterprise-grade security standards.

Encryption. TLS 1.3 in transit; AES-256 at rest.

RBAC. Project-specific permissions ensure only authorized personnel can view or manage sensitive matters.

Immutable Audit Logs. Comprehensive, unchangeable records of all significant user activity within projects for compliance and forensic auditing.

Vetting. Rigorous security vetting of all third-party LLM providers for data handling and privacy standards.

Architectural Comparison

Architectural Comparison

Responsible Disclosure

Responsible Disclosure

We welcome the assistance of the security research community. If you believe you have found a security vulnerability, please contact our security team at legal@plaintiffzero.com.