Tenant separation enforced in the database, and where to find hosting specifics.
Synthelio runs on a managed PostgreSQL database. Your workspace is one tenant within it, and separation between tenants is enforced in the database itself rather than in application code.
This is the part worth understanding, because it is the difference between a real guarantee and a hopeful one.
In many multi-tenant systems, separation is enforced by application logic: every query includes a filter for the current customer, and the system is safe as long as every query remembers. One forgotten filter in one endpoint is a data leak.
Synthelio enforces separation at the row level in the database. The rules live below the application, so a query that forgets to filter does not return another tenant's rows, it returns nothing. The database is the boundary, and there is no path around it.
The same mechanism enforces permissions inside your own workspace. A regular user seeing only their own timesheet, a manager seeing their team, an admin seeing the tenant: those are not screens that hide things, they are rules the database applies to every query.
It is what makes the AI connector safe to offer at all.
Because the connector runs every request as the signed-in person and the database enforces the rules, the connector cannot become a way around your permissions. It is not a second permission surface that has to be kept in sync with the first. There is one set of rules, and everything inherits it.
Application, database, and the MCP connector run on Synthelio's infrastructure. Integration credentials are stored server side.
Your Slack workspace, your Jira instance, your CRM, and your QuickBooks company remain yours and stay where they are. Synthelio reads from them and, in two narrow cases, writes to them. It does not take custody of them.
The infrastructure providers Synthelio relies on are named in Annex III of the Data Processing Addendum, which is part of the agreement rather than a link to a page that can change without notice.
If your procurement or security review needs the hosting region, the sub-processor list, or a specific commitment in writing, that is a reasonable request and the DPA is the document that answers it. Ask rather than infer it from this article.
A point that comes up in most security reviews and is worth stating plainly.
When you connect your own CRM, your own Jira, or your own identity provider to Synthelio, those vendors are not Synthelio sub-processors. They are your vendors, under your agreements, processing your data on your instruction. Synthelio is not interposed in that relationship and does not take on responsibility for it.
This distinction matters when you are filling in a vendor assessment, because listing your own Google Workspace as a Synthelio sub-processor produces a document that is wrong in a way that is hard to unpick later.
Changes are recorded with the actor, a timestamp, and before and after values. That includes anything done by an AI assistant on someone's behalf, which appears under their identity like any other action.
Nothing in Synthelio happens anonymously, and the audit log is readable, so who changed a contract value last week is a question with an answer.
Tell us what you need. We will point you to the answer or write the article.
