Security and accountability for institutional investigation workflows.
Cali Technologies approaches platform security, data handling, and investigative governance as essential considerations for organizations operating in sensitive financial and investigative environments. Our approach emphasizes controlled access, transparent workflows, and accountable use of investigative outputs.
Specific controls, logging depth, and infrastructure options are configured with each customer during enterprise evaluation and deployment.
Controls for sensitive investigation environments
Cali is operated with attention to how investigation data is transmitted, stored, accessed, and reviewed. The following practices guide platform operations and are discussed in detail during institutional security review.
- Encrypted customer connections in transit (HTTPS/TLS).
- Encryption at rest for stored data, using current standards appropriate to the deployment environment.
- Access controls for investigation users and operational roles, configured during deployment where supported.
- Segregation between non-production and production environments.
- Least-privilege access for systems, integrations, and personnel where applicable.
- Logging and monitoring appropriate to the deployment and customer requirements.
- Secure deployment and change-management practices for the Cali platform.
Specific controls may vary by deployment and configuration. This page does not assert independent certifications, audit reports, or framework attestations.
Distinct classes of investigation information
Investigation work spans information with different sensitivity and responsibility profiles. Cali distinguishes the following categories so teams can reason clearly about handling, access, and review expectations.
Public blockchain information
On-chain activity and related public-network records used to reconstruct investigative context.
Third-party intelligence & enrichment
OSINT, labels, and enrichment sources that may accompany investigative review, subject to source terms and deployment configuration.
Customer-provided information
Materials, records, and credentials customers introduce into their investigation environment.
Investigation records & outputs
Case context, structured summaries, reporting drafts, exhibits, and related work product generated during review.
- Case-context handling is scoped to what the investigation workflow requires.
- Customers may request export or deletion of certain investigation-level artifacts where operationally and legally permissible—constraints vary by matter and jurisdiction.
- Retention, backup, and archival behavior are reviewed during enterprise deployment so teams can balance investigative continuity with reducing unnecessary retention.
Formal data-handling, retention, and export documentation is reviewed with legal, risk, audit, and security stakeholders during enterprise evaluations. Specific handling may vary by deployment and configuration.
Shared responsibility for institutional control
Security and trust follow a shared responsibility model. Cali is responsible for the secure operation of the platform as deployed. Customers remain responsible for identity and access management, internal policies, investigation workflows, retention choices, and how investigative outputs are used in their control environment.
Cali Technologies
- Secure operation of the Cali platform as deployed
- Configurable infrastructure and controls where supported by the engagement
- Alignment discussions during evaluation covering logging, retention, and export expectations
Customer institutions
- User access, access reviews, and segregation of duties
- Internal investigation policies and supervisory oversight
- Application of institutional judgment to filings, escalations, and official records
This page does not assert that granular role-based permissions, approval gates, or immutable audit logs are available in every deployment. Access and review capabilities are confirmed during enterprise evaluation where supported.
Human analysis, reviewable outputs, accountable use
Cali provides investigation infrastructure across the platform. Structured outputs— including those produced through Cali Panel workflows—are designed to support human analysis and review. They do not replace professional judgment, institutional policy, or final legal, regulatory, compliance, or enforcement decisions.
Analyst control
- Investigators review, edit, approve, and decide what is escalated or filed.
- Analysts remain accountable for conclusions and language used in official records.
- Where possible, outputs remain tied to visible case context, filters, module views, and evidence so reviewers can understand how they were produced.
Institutional oversight
- Cali is not a law firm, regulator, or auditor, and does not provide legal advice.
- Evidence-linked summaries and documentation support review—they do not replace internal legal, risk, or compliance sign-off.
- Customers apply their own procedures and control frameworks to platform outputs.
Cali Panel workflows operate on the case context the analyst is working in—scoped to what is needed for structured summaries and reporting drafts—with customer-controlled configuration where supported for approved infrastructure and credentials.
Common questions from security and compliance teams
Do you train models on customer data?
This page does not assert a universal model-training policy. Training and retention practices depend on provider selection and deployment configuration. During enterprise evaluation, Cali discusses customer-approved providers, credential handling, and applicable data-use controls where supported.
Can enterprise deployments use customer-approved infrastructure?
Where supported, enterprise evaluations can align provider routing, credentials, and related controls with procurement, security, and information-risk requirements. Available options depend on deployment and contractual scope.
What context is used by the Cali Panel, and how are outputs handled?
The Cali Panel uses the case context needed for the requested structured summary or reporting draft—such as visible metrics, fields, filters, module outputs, and attached artifacts where included. Analysts control when a workflow is invoked. Logging, access, retention, and export behavior are aligned to customer policies during evaluation where supported.
Security posture and available options may vary by deployment and customer configuration.
Topics prospective institutions can discuss during evaluation
Institutional security review extends beyond encryption statements. For investigation teams, evaluation also covers how case context, structured outputs, exports, and review workflows are handled. The following are discussion topics—not guarantees of completed reviews or preconfigured capabilities.
- Data-handling and retention expectations aligned to deployment scope
- Access-control expectations for investigation users and operational roles
- Case-context handling for investigative workflows, including Cali Panel use
- Export, logging, and review requirements relevant to institutional oversight
- Deployment configuration and customer-approved infrastructure options where supported
- Governance expectations for analyst review before escalation or filing
- Documentation and reporting requirements for supervisory or audit review
- Procurement and security-questionnaire topics raised during institutional evaluation
Specific controls, logging depth, and infrastructure options depend on deployment scope and are configured with the customer during enterprise evaluation.
Discuss security and deployment requirements with Cali Technologies.
During enterprise evaluations, we can walk through current controls, deployment considerations, and how Cali fits within your information-security and risk framework.