Episode four of our mini-series on the most common objections to switching to a sovereign cloud: How can the cloud be designed so that compliance is on board from the outset—and regulatory requirements, data protection, and internal policies are taken into account?
In many cloud projects, the compliance department raises concerns sooner or later. The task is clear: minimize risks and comply with regulatory requirements. Especially with international corporations and US hyperscalers, there is justified uncertainty—for example when it comes to handling sensitive data or trade secrets.
This raises the question: Under what conditions can the cloud be designed so that compliance is on board from the outset?
Compliance concerns are not a side issue in cloud projects. They affect key questions around data processing, legal frameworks, and risk assessment. Especially when sensitive data is processed or industry-specific requirements apply, it is understandable that compliance departments take a close look.
The key question, therefore, is not whether cloud and compliance are fundamentally compatible—but under what conditions a cloud solution can be set up so that it meets regulatory requirements and can be robustly assessed internally.
An important point of reference for compliance in terms of sovereignty is the location of the data and its processing, and the applicable legal framework associated with it. If data is processed and stored in data centers in Germany, European and national requirements apply—ones that compliance departments are familiar with from other projects—for example:
A cloud provider with data centers in Germany and non-proprietary software solutions creates a reliable basis. Data processing takes place in a legal environment that can already be assessed and classified internally.
In addition to location, certifications play a central role. They provide verifiable evidence of established processes and security standards:
For compliance departments, these certificates provide concrete reference points: risk analyses, audit preparation, and queries from regulators, customers, or internal audit can be addressed using recognized standards.
Another point is the US CLOUD Act. Under certain conditions, US authorities can access data processed by US companies—even if the data or data processing locations are outside the US.
For compliance, this can be critical especially in the following areas:
A cloud provider that is legally anchored in the EU and has no US parent company significantly reduces this specific risk. Potential access under US law is irrelevant in this scenario. This makes internal assessments and discussions with data protection officers or legal departments easier.
In our whitepaper “Cloud Provider Check: Is it worth switching?” you will find practical checklists for everything you need to consider—as a concrete basis for decision-making for your cloud project.
You can look forward to the following content:
Compliance does not only assess technical measures, but also the documentation behind them: contracts, technical and organizational measures (TOMs), risk assessments, data processing agreements, reports from audits or penetration tests.
A cloud provider is helpful if it:
This creates clear, traceable bases for decisions. Stakeholders on the customer side need to spend less time laboriously gathering information and can focus on assessment and approval.
The objection “Our compliance department is very critical of the cloud” points to key requirements that should be taken into account in any case. A sovereign cloud from Germany offers good starting points here:
If these aspects are incorporated early into provider selection, contract design, and architecture—and compliance is involved from the beginning—robust operating models emerge: cloud solutions that meet functional requirements while respecting regulatory boundaries.
We operate our cloud and colocation platform in our own data centers in Frankfurt am Main and are happy to advise you.
