Security
Security you can verify rather than take on trust
The strongest security claim an open-source product can make is that you do not have to believe it. The code that handles your documents is public, and a self-hosted deployment never talks to us.
Posture
What the platform gives you
Data encryption
All data is encrypted at rest and in transit using industry-standard encryption protocols. In a self-hosted deployment you hold the keys.
Access control
Role-based access control with granular permissions, and an audit log of every read, change and export written to your own database.
Auditable by anyone
The full source is public under AGPLv3. Security review does not depend on our assurances — your team can read the code that handles your documents.
No telemetry
A self-hosted instance makes no outbound calls to us. No usage reporting, no licence check, no phone-home. Verify it in the source, or run it with egress blocked.
Shared responsibility
Who secures what
Self-hosted software splits this differently from SaaS, and being vague about the split is how gaps appear. Here is the line, plainly.
What we are responsible for
The security of the code: reviewing contributions, patching dependencies, publishing advisories, and responding to reports of vulnerabilities in Wraft itself.
What you are responsible for (self-hosted)
Your infrastructure, network boundary, backups, key management, patching cadence, and the access policy of your own users. We cannot see or control any of it.
What we take on (managed)
If we host for you, the operational half moves to us — infrastructure, patching, backups and monitoring — under a written agreement rather than this page.
Security questions