Sovereign Cloud Compass
Local contracting entity & EU governance (operational model)

Local contracting entity & EU governance (operational model)

Why important?

A clear contracting party, responsibilities and governance for operations and support in the EU.

How measured?

Scale 0–5 + N/A:
  • 0 = Contract/responsibility primarily with a non-EU entity
  • 1 = EU contracting claimed, governance/accountability unclear
  • 2 = EU contracting in place, but governance/decision rights weak
  • 3 = EU contracting + defined EU governance (roles/boards/accountability)
  • 4 = EU contracting + strong EU governance, clear rights/controls documented
  • 5 = EU contracting + EU governance with real decision and control rights, contractually evidenced
  • N/A = no reliable evidence

Validation questions (RFP)

  • Which legal entity is the contracting party? Which sub-processors? Who decides on government requests?

Scores comparison

Providers Score
Delos Cloud 5.0
noris Sovereign Cloud 5.0
SysEleven OpenStack Cloud 5.0
AWS European Sovereign Cloud 4.0
STACKIT 4.0
T Cloud Public 4.0
Oracle EU Sovereign Cloud 4.0
pluscloud open 4.0
UpCloud 4.0
Hetzner Cloud 4.0
Scaleway 4.0
Cloud Temple Trusted Cloud 4.0 Contracting entity: Cloud Temple SAS (FR). French law. SecNumCloud governance according to ANSSI requirements. Operating model entirely in FR.
IONOS Cloud 3.0
OVHcloud Public Cloud (inkl. SecNumCloud) 3.0
Exoscale 3.0
Infomaniak Public Cloud 3.0 Contracting entity: Infomaniak Network SA (CH). Swiss law. Not EU law, but GDPR-compliant. Operating model entirely in CH.
Microsoft Sovereign Cloud 2.0