AI code review that stays inside your perimeter.
Regulated teams feel the same pressure as everyone else: agents are writing more code, and review has to keep up. But for a bank, an insurer, or a health platform, the usual answer — pipe your source into a US SaaS and trust the dashboard — does not survive a security review.
The blocker is rarely the review quality. It is the data path: where the code goes, which jurisdiction holds it, who can see it, and whether you can prove all of that to an auditor.
Spinal was built in Berlin with those questions as first-class requirements, not an enterprise afterthought.
Data residency is the default here, not a premium add-on.
The problem isn't the reviews. It's the data path.
Most AI code reviewers are multi-tenant services hosted in the US. To review your pull request, your diff — and often the surrounding repository context — leaves your environment and is processed on infrastructure you do not control, in a jurisdiction you did not choose.
Since Schrems II, that is a legal exposure, not just a preference. Moving EU personal or confidential data to a US service pulls in standard contractual clauses, a transfer impact assessment, and an argument you would rather not have to make to a regulator. For a team under GDPR, DORA, or a customer contract with data-locality clauses, "it is probably fine" is not something a DPO can sign. The tool is rejected before anyone judges whether the reviews are any good.
Keeping the data in the EU — and ideally inside your own perimeter — makes the question go away instead of managing it.
Pick the boundary that fits your risk model.
Spinal runs in three shapes, and all of them keep your code in the EU. The difference is how much of the boundary you operate yourself.
Managed, EU region. We run Spinal for you in an EU region. Your data stays in the EU and you carry no operational load — the right default for most EU teams that do not need physical isolation.
Single-tenant. A dedicated, isolated instance with its own database and storage, not shared with other customers. For teams that need a hard tenancy boundary but still want it managed.
Self-hosted, VPC or on-prem. Spinal runs entirely inside your infrastructure. Source never crosses a boundary your team has not approved. The strongest control, in exchange for running it yourself.
Your model or ours. By default, Spinal reviews code with its own models, so getting a review does not mean shipping your code to a third-party model vendor. Prefer your own? Bring your own model provider and run inference under your own agreement.
Sovereignty you can prove, not just claim.
Residency only counts if procurement and security can verify it without a back-and-forth. Spinal ships the artifacts a review actually asks for:
- An Art. 28 GDPR Data Processing Agreement, with a published sub-processor list.
- A full audit trail of every review and action.
- SSO via SAML or OIDC, so access is governed centrally.
- A clear record of where your data lives and what, if anything, leaves your environment.
That is the difference between telling a regulator you are compliant and showing them. Read the security overview.
None of it costs you the review.
Sovereignty usually means accepting a weaker tool. Not here. The same production-aware review runs in your environment: findings grounded in your architecture and live production signals, risky changes validated by tests that actually run, complete reports before merge. You give up the data exposure — not the depth.
Bring the review to your data.
Run production-aware code review in your VPC, on-prem, or an EU region — with SSO and a full audit trail. Start an evaluation, or read exactly how we handle your data first.