Retrofitting data protection into a working system costs several times what designing for it would have.
Book a consultationPOPIA is usually treated as a policy exercise: write the privacy notice, add a consent checkbox, file it. Then an actual request arrives asking what personal information you hold about someone and where it went, and the system cannot answer, because nobody designed it to.
Almost every expensive compliance problem is really an architecture problem that was cheap to solve at design time and is not cheap now.
Personal information mapped to a lawful basis and a purpose at design time, so the answer exists before anyone asks.
What was agreed, when, and to what, stored as data that can be produced later rather than implied by a form submission.
State changes recorded as they happen. Reporting then becomes a query rather than a reconstruction.
A retention rule that is written in a policy and not implemented in the system is not a retention rule.
What is collected, from whom, why, where it goes and who can see it.
Consent, audit and retention as first-class parts of the data model.
Who can see what, enforced by the system rather than by convention.
Run a real access request and a real deletion against the system before you need to.
The Samloryx platform records consent events as data and keeps a privacy position the business can actually stand behind. See the security page for what is and is not claimed.
When releases take weeks and nobody is sure why, the problem is usually the process around the code rather than the people writing it.
More work than people, but not enough certainty to justify permanent hires yet.
Decisions made on assembled spreadsheets are decisions made on last month's data.
A short call costs nothing and usually makes the answer obvious. If a different piece of work suits you better, we will say so.