Residency & risk map
We trace where your data lives, which frameworks bind it, and which workloads justify sovereign treatment. You get a residency map and a control matrix tied to real systems.
Sovereign AI in the GCC is no longer a future ambition — it is a procurement requirement. Logic Layer is a Claude-native studio of senior engineers who deploy Claude compliantly in KSA and the UAE: data residency you can prove, in-region inference, customer-managed keys, and immutable audit logs designed in from the first commit.
Sovereignty is an engineering posture before it is a policy statement. For Gulf workloads it comes down to where the data lives, where inference runs, and who controls the model.
Prompts, completions, embeddings, and logs stay inside the jurisdiction you name. No cross-border egress, no shadow copies in a foreign region — residency you can prove on audit, not just assert in a deck.
The inference endpoint, the orchestration layer, and the vector store all run in a Gulf availability zone or your own data centre. Latency drops, and the data-transfer questions answer themselves.
You decide which model serves which request, when it changes, and who can see what flows through it. Versions are pinned, access is scoped, and every change is reviewed before it reaches production.
Figures below are directional, illustrating the shape of the moment rather than a benchmark — Vision 2030 and its GCC equivalents have made local AI capability a stated priority.
The same reference architecture serves Claude on a managed cloud or an open-weights model on your own hardware. The model is a swappable dependency behind one governed layer.
Inference, retrieval, and orchestration pinned to a Gulf region. Network policy denies egress by default; allow-lists are reviewed like code.
Encryption keys held in your own KMS / HSM, customer-managed and rotated on your schedule. We never hold the keys to your data.
Every prompt, tool call, and model response is logged immutably with who, what, and when — built for a regulator or an internal review, not just for debugging.
Run Claude through AWS Bedrock or Google Vertex AI in a supported Gulf region, so the managed-service guarantees and the residency story line up.
Where a workload demands full control of the weights on your own hardware, we deploy open-weights models behind the same eval harness and routing layer — the model becomes a swappable dependency.
Tools, data sources, and internal services are exposed through a governed MCP layer, so the same access rules apply whether a request is served by Claude or an in-house model.
$ll deploy --region me-central --provider bedrockresolving model route ............ claude (in-region)data residency ................... me-central · egress deniedkms ............................. customer-managed (your hsm)audit log ........................ immutable · append-only$ll deploy --fallback open-weights --host on-premopen-weights route ............... on-prem gpu · same eval setmcp gateway ...................... tools scoped · access reviewedresidency posture ................ ready for auditIllustrative — the real pipeline is written to your cloud account, your KMS, and your frameworks.
A qualitative orientation, not legal advice — we work alongside your counsel and translate the frameworks below into concrete engineering decisions.
KSA pairs a national data-protection law with sector security controls and a dedicated AI authority. We map each control to a concrete engineering decision rather than a policy PDF.
The UAE runs a federal data-protection law alongside the free-zone regimes of the DIFC and ADGM. The deployment region and free-zone choice change which rules bind you — we design for that up front.
Country detail lives on our Saudi Arabia and UAE pages.
We trace where your data lives, which frameworks bind it, and which workloads justify sovereign treatment. You get a residency map and a control matrix tied to real systems.
A working slice deployed in a Gulf region — Claude on Bedrock or Vertex, customer-managed keys, immutable audit logs, and an eval harness — proving the pattern end to end.
Egress controls, access scoping, drift and cost alarms, and the audit evidence package. We pressure-test the residency claims the way a reviewer would.
We stay on call, tune the routing, update graders as models change, and keep the residency and audit posture intact as the platform grows.
In practice, three things: data that stays in the jurisdiction you name, inference that runs in-region rather than abroad, and control over which model serves which request and who can see the data flowing through it. We design all three in from the first commit.
Yes. We run Claude through AWS Bedrock or Google Vertex AI in a supported region, with customer-managed keys and immutable audit logs, and map each control back to KSA frameworks like PDPL, the NCA Essential Cybersecurity Controls, and SDAIA guidance. Where a workload needs weights on your own hardware, we deploy an open-weights model behind the same eval harness.
Prompts, completions, embeddings, and logs are pinned to an in-region store, egress is denied by default, and the orchestration layer never copies data to a foreign region. Residency becomes something you can demonstrate on audit, not just assert.
You do. Keys live in your own KMS or HSM, customer-managed and rotated on your schedule. We architect the system so we never need custody of the keys to your data.
Either. We write the routing layer so the model is a swappable dependency. Frontier models run through Bedrock or Vertex in-region; open-weights models run on your own hardware when full control of the weights matters. The same eval harness and governance apply to both.
Vision 2030 and its GCC equivalents push national AI capability and local control of data. A sovereign, in-region deployment keeps the capability and the data inside the jurisdiction, which is exactly the posture those programmes ask for — built as working software, not a slide.