The AI data firewall between your data and every model
PortEden sits between AI agents and your providers — Gmail, Calendar, Drive, Outlook, Slack — and strips PII, secrets, and HIPAA identifiers before any prompt reaches Claude, ChatGPT, Copilot, or Gemini. Context hygiene cuts token usage roughly 80%.
Three pillars of enterprise AI governance
Redacted at egress
All 18 HIPAA Safe Harbor identifiers, PCI-DSS payment data, GDPR personal data, and secrets (API keys, JWTs, OAuth tokens, AWS keys, GitHub PATs, private keys) are masked before any prompt leaves your perimeter. ~120 deterministic patterns plus tunable NER. Custom rules supported.
Context hygiene
Clean, minimal data delivered to agents — flat structures, no metadata noise, no nested junk the model doesn't need. Result: ~80% reduction in tokens-in, fewer hallucinations on the way out, lower bills.
Re-hydrated in the user's browser
Structure-preserving placeholders are swapped back to real values client-side, so the user sees the original data. The model never does. Defense in depth — even a leaked transcript carries placeholders, not PHI.
How a data firewall helps you satisfy the controls your auditors read
| Requirement | What PortEden does | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| HIPAA Safe Harbor — 45 CFR §164.514(b)(2) — 18 identifiers | All 18 identifiers (names, geographic subdivisions, dates, phone, fax, email, SSN, MRN, beneficiary numbers, account numbers, certificate/license numbers, vehicle identifiers, device identifiers, URLs, IPs, biometric identifiers, full-face photos, other unique identifiers) masked at egress. | Per-request redaction log · 18-identifier coverage report |
| PCI-DSS — Cardholder data protection | PAN, CVV, and track data detected via Luhn-validated patterns and replaced with structure-preserving placeholders before any model sees the prompt. | Pre-egress masking · structure-preserving placeholders |
| GDPR Art. 4 / Art. 5(1)(f) — Personal data definition & integrity | Pseudonymization at the AI/data boundary. Custom rules for EU-specific identifiers (national ID, VAT, IBAN, NHS number). | DPA · pseudonymization at the AI/data boundary |
| GDPR Art. 32 — Security of processing (pseudonymization) | Pseudonymization with structure preservation: the model sees "PERSON_A1" and "EMAIL_B3" rather than the values. Re-hydration happens in the user's browser, not the model context. | Browser-side re-hydration · model never sees real values |
| CCPA §1798.140 — Sale & sharing limits | Personal data is masked before egress, eliminating model-vendor exposure. Audit trail shows zero personal data in any inference call. | Per-inference audit log · zero-PII assertion exportable |
| NIST 800-53 SC-7 / SC-28 — Boundary protection & data at rest | Egress filtering at the AI boundary. Encrypted in transit (TLS 1.3) and at rest (AES-256). Tenant-isolated key material. | AI-boundary egress filter · TLS 1.3 + AES-256 · tenant-isolated keys |
| EU AI Act Art. 10 — Data and data governance (high-risk systems) | Documented data preparation pipeline: redaction rules, pattern definitions, NER models, and version history are auditable artifacts. | Versioned redaction rules · pattern + NER definitions exportable |
Built for procurement
Talk to our enterprise team
30-minute discovery call. Bring your security questionnaire.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an AI data firewall?
Does redaction break the AI's usefulness?
What gets redacted out of the box?
Can I add custom redaction rules?
Does this work for both inbound and outbound AI traffic?
Where does redaction run — your servers or ours?
Ready to govern AI across your organization?
Book a discovery call. Bring your security questionnaire — DPA, subprocessor list, and pen-test summary available on request.