Zero setup
Permissions arrive on their own.
Sources mirror the sharing your systems already declare — repo access, Drive sharing, space roles, channel membership. Nothing to configure, nothing to maintain.
Where access comes from ›
Product · Customization & permissions
Everyone sees only theirs.
Two people ask the same question and get two truthful answers, each scoped to the documents that person may see. Access is read from your sources and enforced inside every query, never bolted onto a surface.
Enforcement
Permission decides what exists for you.
It is settled before a question is even considered, everywhere the assistant answers — web console, every messaging channel, the API. No unfiltered path to your documents, no surface to misconfigure, no channel that "forgot" to check.
The security record ›
Yours
It carries your name, and your rules.
Your team signs into "{Your company} Assistant" — your logo on the sign-in page, the header and the chat widget, your name in the assistant's identity, your languages. Invitation-based accounts, every change on a tamper-evident record.
Branding, in the docs ›
Access control for AI answers, explained
Can AI respect our document permissions?
Yes, if the filter lives in the right place. In Naxis Assistant, access control sits inside the search itself, on every surface alike, so there is no unfiltered path to your documents and no channel that "forgot" to check. The full mechanism is written up for your reviewers.
Where do the permissions come from?
From you, in the vocabulary you already use: groups. Sources can mirror the sharing your drives and systems declare, administrators assign people to groups, and a per-file access map shows exactly who can read what.
What happens when someone loses access?
Access changes apply immediately, without re-indexing anything. The next question is already scoped to the new reality.
Can two people really get different answers to the same question?
Yes, and both answers are true. Each person is answered only from documents their groups may read, so scope differs while honesty does not. The sales lead sees the deal note; support sees the tickets; neither sees the other's material in their answer.
Can we put our own name and logo on it?
Every deployment carries the client's name: your logo on the sign-in page, the header and the chat widget, your company name in the assistant's identity, your language defaults. Accounts are invitation-based, administrators never set or see a password.
Is there a record of who asked what?
Yes, a complete one. Every answer and every permission change lands on an audit record that can prove it has not been tampered with. Deployments that must not retain content can log metadata only; the details are on the security page.
Double productivity now
Live demoNotes from the build.
Shadow AI: your people are asking someone else about your company
Every paste into a consumer chatbot is a question your own systems could not answer fast enough. Security vendors sell detection, which reads the app and never the question. What the 2026 breach data actually shows, how far Microsoft's new Shadow AI controls really reach, and why the only fix that scales is making the company answerable.
Naxis vs Glean: enterprise platform or private knowledge engine?
Glean is Google for your company: it finds where things are stored. Naxis is the private knowledge engine that knows what is actually true right now. Different machines, different questions, different prices. An honest way to choose, and the Glean alternative for companies of 5 to 200 people.
Why consolidating all your company's data into one system keeps failing, and what to do instead
Lidl wrote off €500 million trying. Birmingham City Council is £144 million in and reinstalling from scratch. Consolidation megaprojects fail for a structural reason: real work is too fluid to hold one shape. The part you actually wanted, one place to ask, never needed the migration.