WZ-IT Logo
§203 StGB

AI for confidentiality professionals - sovereign, local, §203-compliant

ChatGPT with client or patient data can be a criminal offence. We build AI that never leaves your premises - on your hardware, integrated into your professional software, contractually safeguarded under §203.

Your hardware, your dataOpen source, no lock-inLiability & contract
Explore the AI Cube

Leading companies worldwide trust WZ-IT

  • Rekorder
  • Keymate
  • Führerscheinmacher
  • SolidProof
  • ARGE
  • Boese VA
  • NextGym
  • Maho Management
  • Golem.de
  • Millenium
  • Paritel
  • Yonju
  • EVADXB
  • Mr. Clipart
  • Aphy
  • Negosh
  • ABCO Water
The problem

Four patterns that block AI here

Cloud AI processes inputs on third-party servers - a possible disclosure under §203, regardless of a DPA.

A data processing agreement covers data-protection law, not the criminal duty of secrecy.

US providers are subject to the CLOUD Act; EU residency does not protect against authority access.

Responsibility lies with the professional - not the employee who uses the tool.

Legal framework

§203 StGB & AI: the full mechanics

Most providers only say „§203 = no cloud“. What matters is the mechanics behind it - and how to fulfil them cleanly by contract and technically.

What §203 StGB prohibits

§203 StGB criminalises the unauthorised disclosure of others' secrets by professionals bound to secrecy - client, patient and party data, trade secrets. „Unauthorised“ means: without consent of the secret-holder and without legal authority. Penalty: up to one year imprisonment or a fine (subs. 1), up to two years for acting for payment (subs. 5). Offence prosecuted on application (§205 StGB), plus professional-law consequences up to withdrawal of the licence.

Why cloud AI is the problem

Inputs to ChatGPT, Copilot & co. are processed on third-party servers (often in the US). This transmission can already be a disclosure within the meaning of §203 StGB - regardless of whether the provider actively uses the data. A DPA under Art. 28 GDPR changes nothing: §203 goes beyond data-protection law and prohibits disclosure to third parties additionally and independently. A DPA is not §203 - both are required.

What the 2017 reform allows

Since the reform an IT service provider, as a „contributing person“ (§203 (3) s. 2 StGB), may receive access to protected information WITHOUT this being a punishable disclosure - if three conditions are met: (1) necessity for the service, (2) obligation in text form with instruction on the criminal consequences (§126b BGB), (3) careful selection, supervision and immediate termination on breach.

The flip side - your risk

Whoever does NOT oblige the contributing person becomes liable themselves under §203 (4) no. 1 StGB. Not the employee who enters data into a tool bears responsibility - but the professional (firm/practice owner). What is punishable is not the input into a secured system, but the missing contractual safeguard.

Skin in the game

With the reform, the contributing person is itself included in liability under §203 (4) s. 2 StGB. As your obliged service provider we are jointly liable - that is not a risk for you, but your safeguard.

The subcontractor chain

If a provider brings in subcontractors (Azure, AWS, Vercel), THESE must also be obliged in text form. With US hyperscalers this is practically not feasible - and the US CLOUD Act applies, enabling access by US authorities; EU residency does not protect against that. On-premise on your hardware has no such chain: the data does not leave your building. Our remote-maintenance access still makes us a contributing person - which is why we commit contractually, for the build and maintenance phase.

Our §203 compliance package

Standard part of every build / AI Cube contract - for build and maintenance phase:

AVV (Art. 28 DSGVO)

Data-protection layer

Secrecy obligation

Text form + criminal instruction (§203/§126b)

Subcontractor proof

short chain / on-prem

This content is general information and not legal or tax advice. The specific obligation of contributing persons under §203 StGB and the respective professional-law requirements must be reviewed by a lawyer/tax advisor on a case-by-case basis.

Our approach

Advise. Build. Operate. From one team.

Sovereign AI is a lifecycle, not a device purchase - and everything stays on your infrastructure.

01

Advise & design

Workshop, sizing, data classification and §203 contract framework. We understand your stack, professional software and compliance requirements before we recommend.

02

Build & integrate

On-premise build on your hardware, RAG on your documents with access control, integration into your professional software, secrecy obligation + DPA.

03

Operate & maintain (optional)

Updates, monitoring, model upgrades and RAG maintenance as a service contract - or you operate fully yourself. Handover and knowledge transfer included.

Why WZ-IT

Three reasons that make the difference

Your hardware, your data

On-premise build at your site - no data outflow, no CLOUD Act risk.

Open source, no lock-in

Ollama, vLLM, Open WebUI, Qdrant - operable internally, no vendor lock-in.

Liability & contract

§203 secrecy obligation with criminal instruction + DPA + Hiscox IT liability insurance.

Frequently asked questions

Let's Talk About Your Idea

Whether a specific IT challenge or just an idea - we look forward to the exchange. In a brief conversation, we'll evaluate together if and how your project fits with WZ-IT.

E-Mail
[email protected]

Leading companies trust WZ-IT

  • Rekorder
  • Keymate
  • Führerscheinmacher
  • SolidProof
  • ARGE
  • Boese VA
  • NextGym
  • Maho Management
  • Golem.de
  • Millenium
  • Paritel
  • Yonju
  • EVADXB
  • Mr. Clipart
  • Aphy
  • Negosh
  • ABCO Water
Timo Wevelsiep & Robin Zins - CEOs of WZ-IT

Timo Wevelsiep & Robin Zins

Managing Directors of WZ-IT

1/3 - Topic Selection33%

What is your inquiry about?

Select one or more areas where we can support you.