Built for Law Firms & In-House Legal Teams

AI That Works for Your Firm, Without the Risk

Your attorneys are already using AI. The question is whether they are using one that keeps client information where it belongs. Cognetryx runs entirely inside your firm's network - no subscriptions that own your data, no terms of service that matter more than your client's trust, no cloud server your client never agreed to.

Book a Free AI Strategy Assessment → How We Talk to Compliance Teams

72%

Of legal professionals are using AI tools at work - most without firm-sanctioned platforms

Thomson Reuters, 2024

Client matter data ever transmitted outside your network when Cognetryx is deployed

Architectural outcome

90 days

Typical time from kickoff to a fully deployed, firm-wide system

Implementation roadmap

The Problem

The AI Your Firm Already Uses Probably Wasn't Designed for This

ChatGPT, Copilot, and consumer AI tools were built for general use. They were not built around the premise that every document in your queue belongs to a client who never agreed to have their information processed outside your firm. That gap is a problem whether or not it has caused an incident yet.

Privilege Risk

Here is the scenario that keeps ethics partners up at night: an associate drafts a brief using a cloud AI tool. The prompt includes case facts, client identity, and opposing counsel's strategy. That information is now on an external server, processed under terms of service your client never saw. Whether that creates a disclosure problem depends on jurisdiction and circumstance - but it is a problem that disappears entirely when the AI runs inside your firm. No transmission. No analysis required. No conversation with the client about it.

Client Confidentiality

The Associate Who "Just Used ChatGPT to Save Time"

It happens in every firm. A second-year uses a consumer AI tool to draft a motion, summarize a deposition, or organize case research. The tool works. The document looks fine. And somewhere on an external server, your client's case facts just became training data you don't control and can't recall.

Ethics Obligations

Your Firm AI Policy Doesn't Cover What You Can't See

Most firm AI policies were written in response to behavior that was already happening. They describe what attorneys should do. They cannot undo disclosures that already occurred, and they don't help a managing partner sleep better when the answer to "where did that data go?" is "we don't actually know."

New Business Risk

Intake and Conflicts Are Where the Exposure Starts Earliest

A prospective client calls. Staff enters names, matter type, and adverse parties into an AI tool to check for conflicts or draft the engagement letter. That information now exists outside your firm before the relationship even begins. If the matter becomes contentious, that is a conversation you do not want to have.

The firms that have successfully adopted AI at scale did one thing differently: they gave their people a tool that was genuinely better than the free one - and that happened to solve the confidentiality problem at the same time. When AI runs inside your firm and knows your precedents, your clients, and your practice areas, it is not a compliance compromise. It is just a better tool. The risk elimination comes along for free.

The Answer

AI That Fits How Your Firm Actually Works

Cognetryx deploys inside your firm's existing network. Attorneys and staff use it the way they would use any tool - asking questions, getting answers, moving on. The difference is that everything stays inside your walls, grounded in your firm's own knowledge.

🔒

Client Information Stays in the Firm. Always.

There is no cloud server. No vendor data policy to review. No subscription terms that create ambiguity about who owns what. The AI processes everything inside your network, and client matter information never leaves.

📋

Each Matter Stays Separate

The system respects your existing matter access configurations. An attorney working on one client's case can't surface another client's privileged documents. Confidentiality walls between matters work the same way they do for your human staff - by policy enforced at the system level.

🔑

Same Logins, Same Permissions, No New Complexity

Cognetryx uses your firm's existing login system. Attorneys get access to what their role allows. When someone leaves the firm, their AI access disappears at the same time as everything else. Your IT team handles it the same way they handle every other system.

📚

Answers from Your Firm's Own Knowledge

Precedent files, internal memos, approved templates, practice group guidance, and matter histories get indexed. When an attorney asks a question, the answer comes from your firm's body of work - not a generic legal database or what the internet thinks about your practice area.

🏛️

You Own It. Completely.

Your data, your infrastructure, your system. No vendor can change the terms on you, sunset the model you depend on, or hold your matter data hostage to a contract renewal conversation. What you build with Cognetryx belongs to your firm.

⚡

Better Than the Free Tool on the Questions That Matter

Attorneys use ChatGPT when it is faster and more useful than the alternative. Cognetryx is faster on firm-specific questions - because it knows your precedents, your standard language, and your clients' industries. The governed tool wins when it is genuinely better.

Where Firms Start

High-Leverage Use Cases in Law Firms and In-House Legal

The fastest ROI comes from AI that handles documented, repetitive, privilege-sensitive work that is already happening - just without the right controls. Cognetryx operationalizes existing institutional knowledge without replacing attorney judgment.

📑

Contract Review & Drafting

Associates draft and review contracts grounded in your firm's own playbooks, precedent libraries, and clause databases - without sending client agreement terms to an external server for analysis.

🔍

eDiscovery & Document Review

AI-assisted document analysis and issue tagging runs entirely inside the case environment. Privilege review workflows that flag potentially privileged materials never route that material outside the firm's boundary.

⚖️

Legal Research & Memo Drafting

Research memos grounded in your practice group's existing work product, internal guidance notes, and approved case law databases. Output stays inside the matter, logged and traceable.

🔄

Matter Intake & Conflict Screening

New business intake workflows that surface potential conflicts from internal matter databases without exposing prospective client identities and adverse party information to a third-party AI processor.

📊

Regulatory Compliance Research

In-house legal teams query internal policy libraries, past regulatory submissions, and compliance frameworks in plain language. Answers cite your organization's own governance documents, not generic summaries.

🎓

Associate Training & Onboarding

New attorneys access institutional knowledge about firm practice standards, client preferences, and matter histories without requiring a senior partner to interrupt billing time answering orientation questions.

Ethics & Compliance Mapping

How the Architecture Addresses Lawyer Professional Responsibility

Bar ethics opinions on AI are converging on a consistent message: the competence and confidentiality obligations travel with the tool selection. Here is how Cognetryx directly addresses each obligation without requiring attorneys to change how they work.

Obligation / Framework

The Requirement

How Cognetryx Addresses It

ABA Model Rule 1.6

Lawyers must make reasonable efforts to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of client information.

No client information is transmitted to a third party. The reasonable effort standard is satisfied by architecture, not policy overlay.

ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024)

Generative AI use is governed by competence, confidentiality, supervision, and candor obligations. Attorneys must understand how AI tools handle client data.

The data handling answer is simple: it never leaves your network. Supervision obligations are supported by immutable audit logging of every AI interaction.

ABA Model Rule 1.1 (Competence)

Competence includes understanding the benefits and risks of relevant technology, including AI tools used in the practice of law.

Every interaction is traceable to source material. Attorneys can review AI reasoning and understand exactly what documentation informed a response.

ABA Model Rule 5.1 / 5.3 (Supervision)

Partners and managing partners must supervise subordinate attorneys and nonlawyer assistants, including their use of AI tools.

Comprehensive audit logging provides supervisory visibility into AI-assisted work. Matter-level access controls prevent unsupervised access to restricted information.

State Bar AI Ethics Opinions

State bars in California, New York, Florida, and others have issued AI-specific guidance emphasizing confidentiality, vendor due diligence, and client disclosure obligations.

Because no client data reaches a third-party vendor, vendor due diligence obligations and client disclosure requirements around external AI processing do not apply.

Work Product Doctrine

Work product prepared in anticipation of litigation may lose protection if shared with a third party who is not aligned with the client's legal interests.

Work product never leaves the firm's or organization's network. There is no third-party transmission to analyze under the doctrine.

Built For Legal Leadership

We Understand the Conversation You Need to Have With Your Ethics Partner

Mid-market firms move fast on client work and carefully on technology. The managing partner's question is not usually "can AI help us?" - it is "can we do this without creating a problem we don't currently have?" That is a fair question, and the answer here is yes.

Cognetryx is led by a CISSP-certified founder with nearly 20 years of experience building secure infrastructure for regulated industries, and a Head of Go-to-Market with nearly two decades inside regulated financial services. We have built systems where the bar for data handling is set by examiners and regulators, not just internal policy. Legal is not a new challenge for us - it is the same fundamental requirement dressed in different professional obligations.

Our engagement includes firm leadership and IT briefings, attorney and staff training, and 30 days of on-site support at go-live. The goal is for your next conversation about AI to be the easy one.

CISSP ABA Rule 1.6 Work Product eDiscovery Matter Access Controls Audit Logging

Keith Kennedy

Founder & CEO, CISSP

"The question an ethics partner asks about AI is not 'what can it do?' It is 'where does the data go?' When the answer is 'it never leaves your network,' the conversation is over. That is the whole product."

Keith has advised mid-market and enterprise organizations on HIPAA, SEC/FINRA, GDPR, and general IT governance compliance. He leads the technical and security posture of every Cognetryx deployment, and has built systems specifically designed to answer regulatory and ethics questions before they are asked.

Common Questions

What Managing Partners and General Counsel Ask

Does sending client information to a cloud AI waive attorney-client privilege? +

The privilege analysis is fact-specific and jurisdiction-dependent, but the risk is real and documented. Courts and bar ethics committees have noted that transmitting confidential client information to third-party cloud services may constitute a voluntary disclosure to a non-privileged party. When AI runs inside your firm's network, no client information leaves your control - there is no third-party transmission, and the privilege analysis does not arise.

What are attorneys' professional responsibility obligations around AI and client confidentiality? +

ABA Model Rule 1.6 requires lawyers to make reasonable efforts to prevent unauthorized disclosure of client information. ABA Formal Opinion 512 (2024) on generative AI clarifies that attorneys must apply competence and confidentiality obligations to AI tool selection itself. State bar ethics opinions in California, New York, Florida, and others have reinforced this. Using cloud AI tools that transmit client data to external servers without thorough vendor evaluation and client disclosure creates professional responsibility exposure that most firms are not actively managing.

How does Cognetryx handle work product doctrine and confidential matter information? +

Because Cognetryx runs entirely inside your firm's or organization's network, work product and client matter information never leaves the protected environment. Your existing matter management and access controls govern who can query which information. The system can be configured to respect matter-level access restrictions, ensuring attorneys and staff only surface information they are permitted to access. Confidentiality walls between matters are enforced architecturally, not by policy alone.

How does Cognetryx work for in-house legal departments at regulated companies? +

In-house legal teams at financial services companies, healthcare organizations, and other regulated enterprises face a dual burden: their own professional responsibility obligations under applicable bar rules and their employer's sector-specific regulatory requirements. Cognetryx deploys inside the enterprise's existing network, inheriting both the company's IT governance controls and the legal department's matter access configurations. No client or privileged information flows to external vendors. See our Banking & Financial Services and Healthcare pages for sector-specific detail.

What about matter conflict checks and new business intake? +

New business intake and conflict checking involves some of the most sensitive information a firm handles - prospective client identities, adverse parties, and matter descriptions. Processing this data through a cloud AI creates confidentiality exposure before the client relationship even begins. Cognetryx indexes your firm's internal conflict databases and matter management systems so intake AI workflows stay entirely within the firm's walls. The analysis runs inside your environment; nothing about the prospective engagement is transmitted externally.

How long does deployment take at a law firm or in-house legal department? +

Most firm and in-house deployments reach pilot stage in 6 to 10 weeks, with full rollout in 90 days. Cognetryx includes white-glove onboarding, staff and attorney training, and 30 days of on-site support at go-live. For law firms, we also support presentations to firm leadership and IT steering committees. Timeline depends on infrastructure readiness, the scope of matter data and precedent libraries to be integrated, and the number of practice groups in the initial deployment.