D
DiliTrust

DiliTrust combines contract lifecycle management, board meetings, legal entities, matters and secure file sharing in one governance suite. Its Lini engine applies AI to those workflows through contract extraction, summaries, meeting transcription, draft minutes and matter status updates. Risk Detector reads Word or PDF agreements, applies internal playbooks and highlights clauses with proposed tracked edits for a reviewer to accept or adjust.

QuickView assembles past and upcoming matter developments into a summary that a user can share. CRM connections support contract creation, while Word, Google Docs and communication tools connect legal work to existing office systems. DiliTrust Sign adds native simple electronic signatures and completion certificates, with availability expanding module by module; external providers remain available for other signature requirements.

Corporate departments and boards are the main audience, alongside law firms and public organizations. Local infrastructure, customer controlled keys and independent ISO certifications support the security offering. A policy prohibits training global models with client data. Subscription pricing depends on users, selected solutions and customization, with rates supplied through an individual proposal.

Compared with

DiliTrust, head to head

Side by side on the same 15 capability axes and 12 legal signals: where the two part company, and what neither one publishes.

Build your own comparison

Capability grades

All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.

BB on AI CentralityThe models are the engine of a core capability, layered on a product that would still function without them as a document or workflow system.

AI Centrality

How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.

Lini supplies AI functions across DiliTrust's five governance modules: contracts, entities, matters, board meetings and secure file sharing. Risk Detector applies internal playbooks and proposes tracked edits, while extraction fills contract summary sheets. Other functions transcribe meeting recordings, draft minutes, summarize files and generate QuickView matter updates. These functions extend systems that also manage permissions, calendars, agreements and corporate structures without generative processing.

The AI is embedded in the suite rather than constituting the entire product. Customers can additionally connect their own language models through a secure API, subject to their chosen integration and governance arrangements.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Citation Accuracy and Hallucination DisclosureGrounding is real and documented, with linked primary sources and a described retrieval method, short of published accuracy figures an outsider can test.

Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure

Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.

Risk Detector accepts a Word or PDF agreement, identifies its type and applies the customer's playbook rules. It highlights the clauses that depart from those rules alongside proposed edits, leaving the original contract language available for inspection before the reviewer accepts or adjusts a suggestion. This gives contract findings a concrete source and review path. The same assurance is not quantified across generated meeting minutes, general summaries or QuickView updates.

No reproducible accuracy benchmark or error distribution is specified for those functions. A highlighted contractual passage also says nothing about the validity of an external legal proposition or current case authority.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Autonomy and Oversight ModelA written commitment that the models work alongside a supervising lawyer, with real review surfaces, short of the full control structure: commonly the threshold at which the system stops or what happens after it is wrong.

Autonomy and Oversight Model

What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.

Users initiate AI work by supplying an agreement, asking a question or requesting a summary. Risk Detector returns highlighted clauses and tracked proposals that the reviewer can accept or adjust. Minutes Generation provides an editable draft assembled from meeting files and recordings; QuickView produces a matter update for the user to inspect and share. The AI Code of Conduct requires human oversight for critical decisions, and the security sheet describes human validation by default.

These review surfaces keep users involved, but DiliTrust does not define a critical decision, automatic uncertainty thresholds or an escalation route for unreliable output.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Operational and Outcome EvidenceReal deployment evidence with substance, short of full attribution or measurement: a named customer without figures, or figures without the named customer.

Operational and Outcome Evidence

Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.

Consort Group's head of legal, Claire Dolley, describes DiliTrust as the central working tool for its contract activity in an account updated August 18, 2026. Legal and procurement jointly selected the system to replace fragmented contracting information. The implementation combined repository migration, approval workflows, renewal alerts, templates, signatures and required metadata fields. New sales employees receive mandatory training, and the shared system supports both sales and procurement.

This account explains deployment and organizational adoption in concrete terms. It does not provide a measured before and after result or attribute a defined portion of the improvement to Lini's AI features.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Privilege and Confidentiality PostureSubstantive published commitments on confidentiality and training use, short of the full picture: commonly silence on segregation between users or matters, or on what the underlying model provider may retain.

Privilege and Confidentiality Posture

How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.

The security sheet expressly excludes client data from training global models and confines ordinary AI processing to DiliTrust's infrastructure. The product uses granular permissions, encryption, separate data access and audit trails, while the vendor states that its team has no access to critical customer information. Customers can retain encryption keys in their own PKCS#11 compatible hardware security module. Private customer specific model training and a contractual training prohibition are not set out in a customer agreement available before procurement.

DiliTrust does not address legal privilege preservation, production prompt retention or the full hosting and support processor chain.

Source: Vendor Published
DD on UPL and Professional Responsibility PostureNothing published on the advice line for a product that produces legal work, including where it is sold to people who are not lawyers.

UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture

Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.

Lini assists legal teams with contract revisions, board minutes, summaries and matter updates. The AI Code of Conduct requires human judgment for critical decisions, and each workflow leaves users with material to inspect or edit. However, the professional boundary between that assistance and legal advice is not defined through an explicit advice disclaimer or jurisdictional duty framework. The audience includes corporate counsel, law firms and public organizations, whose responsibilities differ by role and jurisdiction.

General human oversight does not specify who must supervise a generated resolution, verify a proposed clause or approve its use under the professional rules governing an engagement.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Governance and Bias DisclosureA published governance framework with real substance, short of testing results or a named owner.

AI Governance and Bias Disclosure

Published governance over model behavior: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.

DiliTrust's AI Code of Conduct describes in-house development, synthetic and public training data, local processing infrastructure and customer model connectivity. It commits to testing and monitoring for bias, making AI processes understandable and retaining human oversight of critical decisions. Its security sheet adds human validation by default and places model processing inside the controlled infrastructure. These provisions give the governance approach substance beyond a general fairness statement.

Named evaluation datasets, release acceptance criteria and results showing uneven performance across languages, legal tasks or populations are not supplied. Security leadership and machine learning roles are listed, but no complete model accountability process is published.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on AI Safety and Data StewardshipSubstantive published policy covering most of the ground, short of the full set: commonly no named subprocessor list or no stated incident practice.

AI Safety and Data Stewardship

Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.

The platform combines user permissions, encryption, audit trails, watermarks, daily backups and monitoring. Each server request requires authentication and permission to proceed, and customer controlled encryption keys are available through an external hardware security module. Backups remain in the production country's jurisdiction at a separate location. Security testing includes internal reviews, weekly automated scans and an annual independent assessment.

The privacy notice addresses website and business contact information, with general deletion on request. Those materials give no production prompt retention, no lifespan for backup copies, no complete service subprocessor list and no customer incident notification deadline.

Source: Vendor Published
DD on AI Liability and RecourseNothing published on who bears the loss when the system is wrong.

AI Liability and Recourse

What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.

Lini can propose agreement language, produce board minutes and summarize active matters, but a customer facing allocation of loss for incorrect output is not set out in an available subscription agreement. The website legal notice disclaims warranties and damages for website materials; it contains no AI output indemnity, application liability cap or product service level commitment. Security certifications and audit reports address controls rather than compensation after a mistaken recommendation.

The terms governing enterprise use therefore remain dependent on procurement materials, with no stated public warranty or insurance commitment covering a flawed clause or inaccurate account of a board decision.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Practice Systems Integration DepthReal integrations exist and are documented, short of depth: named connections without a description of what they actually move.

Practice Systems Integration Depth

How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.

CRM connections generate and populate contracts from Salesforce opportunities, HubSpot deals and Microsoft Dynamics data. Word and Google Docs support drafting, Teams and Outlook carry board materials and invitations, and Gmail brings communications into matter management. Registry partners synchronize entity and filing information. Signature integrations include Docusign, Adobe Sign and several European providers. DiliTrust Sign adds native simple electronic signatures with automatic storage of the signed file and completion certificate, rolling out progressively across modules.

The external connections have described purposes and data flows, but administrator configuration, detailed field mappings and deployment prerequisites are not supplied as an implementation reference.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Deployment Model and Data ResidencyDeployment model is stated clearly with partial residency detail, or residency is offered without the processing location being addressed, or the tenancy model is stated on its own with no residency detail published.

Deployment Model and Data Residency

Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.

The security sheet places European customers in Europe, Canadian customers in Canada, Latin American customers in Canada or Europe, and American customers in the United States. It describes regional options for the Middle East and Africa, including Morocco, and keeps backup copies within the same country as production. Ordinary AI processing uses local DiliTrust infrastructure, while customers may connect their own models through an API.

Customer managed encryption keys are also available. DiliTrust gives no complete list of hosting countries, tenancy choices or processing implications for each customer selected model connection, so regional commitments do not resolve every deployment configuration.

Source: Vendor Published
AA on Security Certifications and Trust CenterCurrent independent attestation with named scope, reachable without a sales call: a trust center carrying reports, dates and the standards actually covered.

Security Certifications and Trust Center

Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.

AFNOR certificates cover delivery and operation of the DiliTrust Governance Suite as SaaS under ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and ISO/IEC 27701:2019. Both run from February 23, 2026 through February 22, 2029, with the Puteaux site and remote access from Canada identified. The statement of applicability is version six dated June 28, 2024. The certificates can be obtained without a sales request. DiliTrust also claims SOC 2 Type II compliance, with that report supplied on request, and an ENS certification for Spain.

Its separate security sheet describes audit practices, encryption and infrastructure; those explanations do not extend the certificates beyond their stated scope.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Model Supply Chain DisclosureThe supply chain is partly disclosed: providers named without change notification, or architecture described without the providers.

Model Supply Chain Disclosure

Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.

DiliTrust develops and operates its own legal models and names the suite's AI engine Lini. The AI Code of Conduct describes pre-finetuning and fine-tuning commercially permissible open models with synthetic legal material, public datasets and an internal knowledge base. Processing takes place within local infrastructure, and customers may attach their own language models through an API. The underlying model families and versions are not identified, despite broader marketing language about fully proprietary technology.

Nor is a model specific advance change notice promised. The architecture is described, while the precise foundation model and any customer selected provider remain configuration questions.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Commercial TransparencyReal pricing is published for part of the range, with enterprise tiers withheld, or the unit and structure are stated without the figure.

Commercial Transparency

Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.

Pricing depends on user numbers, the selected solutions and customization requirements. DiliTrust offers tailored arrangements and demonstrations, but no subscription rate or minimum purchase is stated. Onboarding covers setup, migration, training and support; the main offering includes ongoing multilingual support and user training. Implementation duration varies with project complexity, and consulting is available for integrations and configuration.

Its ROI calculators estimate potential savings without establishing the actual invoice. A price comparison therefore requires a proposal defining modules, user scope, services and signature requirements; DiliTrust publishes no renewal terms, implementation charges or cost for optional model connections.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Firm and Practice CoverageSegment and practice coverage is described with substance, short of the boundaries: what is supported is clear, what is not is left open.

Firm and Practice Coverage

Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.

Corporate legal departments, general counsel, boards and company secretaries are the main audience for the governance suite. It combines entity administration, contracts, disputes and matter tracking, meeting workflows and protected file exchange. Industry material addresses pharmaceuticals, private equity, real estate and energy. The FAQ additionally identifies law firms and public sector organizations and says smaller businesses can use tailored packages, so coverage is broader than large corporate departments alone.

Multilingual operation and international deployment are supported, but a precise jurisdictional legal content inventory, government deployment requirements and exclusions by practice type or organizational size are not supplied.

Source: Vendor Published
Sources on file

8 public documents

The public pages on file for DiliTrust, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.

Pricing

Custom quote based on users, solutions and customization

USD, as published, never converted
  • DiliTrust requires a custom subscription quote.
  • User numbers, selected modules and customization determine the proposal.
  • Setup, migration and integration costs have no stated rate.
  • Ongoing training and support are included in the main offering.

Pricing depends on user count, the selected DiliTrust solutions and customization. No subscription amount or minimum commitment is stated. Demonstrations are arranged through sales; a self service free trial is not stated.

Implementation: Onboarding covers setup, migration and training. Implementation and integration consulting costs are not stated; ongoing user training and multilingual support are included in the main offering.

Confidentiality and data terms: A HIPAA agreement or specific healthcare data tier is not identified for the DiliTrust suite.

Note: Renewal, cancellation, signature allowance and optional model connection charges are unspecified. Industry pricing ranges in educational articles describe the broader software market, not a DiliTrust price list.

Legal Signals

What each signal means

A signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.

Confidentiality and Privilege

Client Data in Training

Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?

Never, in policy only

A public policy or trust page states no training on customer content, with no matching term located in the published agreement.

Client material is excluded from training global models by the security sheet. The AI Code of Conduct separately describes synthetic data, public datasets and an internal knowledge base for the vendor's own model development. This is an express policy assurance for shared models, without a matching customer contract available before procurement or a clear position on private customer specific adaptation. The privacy notice's general service improvement language concerns business and user information and does not itself specify model training.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Prompt and Output Retention

How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?

Not addressed

No located public material states how long prompts and outputs are retained.

The AI processing path ends with results returned to the user, without a stated period for keeping prompts, generated text or meeting recordings. Daily infrastructure backups are described, without a deletion cycle. The website privacy notice allows retention for as long as needed and deletion within a reasonable time on request; it sets no rules for production AI history. No customer setting for prompt expiry or zero retention is identified for Lini's contract, board or matter workflows.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation

Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?

Own model, documented

The product maintains its own permission model, documented, requiring the firm to keep it aligned.

Administrators define roles, permissions and access to individual files and functions within DiliTrust. Server requests are authenticated and authorized before execution, with audit trails capturing user activity and changes. Watermarks and controlled sharing help track distribution of sensitive corporate material. This is the suite's own access system rather than a stated inheritance of external document repository permissions.

The materials do not specify automated conflicts screening, matter wall synchronization or exactly how every Lini retrieval request applies an individual user's file permissions.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice

If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?

Disclosure addressed, notice absent

Published terms or policy address disclosure to authorities or in response to legal process, and no commitment or reservation regarding customer notice is located anywhere. The vendor has told the customer that data can leave and has said nothing about whether the customer hears of it.

The privacy notice permits cooperation with legal process and other requests considered necessary to protect rights or prevent harmful activity. It also says the company rejects demands it considers unfounded, overbroad or unrelated to their purpose. There is no corresponding commitment to notify the affected customer, offer time to object or report the demand afterward. Regional hosting and claims about foreign government access address where information is held, not whether customers are told when a competent authority requests disclosure.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence
Accuracy and Authority

Primary Law Corpus Provenance

Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?

Not addressed

No located public material identifies the corpus behind the product’s answers.

Lini primarily analyzes customer agreements, board materials and matter information. Its model development description names categories of training material, including synthetic data and public datasets, but identifies no specific collection of primary law, publisher or statutory source. The statement that base models permit commercial use is not a license for a defined legal research corpus. International and multilingual capabilities likewise say nothing about jurisdiction by jurisdiction authority coverage or the update schedule behind an answer containing a legal proposition.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Good Law Verification

Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.

Risk Detector compares contract provisions with internal rules, while other AI functions produce meeting minutes and matter summaries. No licensed citator or mechanism for showing whether a case has been reversed, distinguished or overruled is specified. Entity registry integrations keep corporate filings aligned with official sources, which serves a different purpose from validating case authority. The suite's review controls support inspection of customer materials, but they include no current-law check for legal propositions in a generated response.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior

What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.

Users can adjust contract suggestions, edit generated minutes and inspect a QuickView summary before sharing it. The Code of Conduct requires human oversight for critical decisions, but no AI refusal condition, confidence cutoff or request for clarification is specified for unsupported answers. A reviewer may see the original clause or meeting material without receiving a warning that the model lacks adequate support. The prescribed human role therefore leaves open how Lini itself behaves when a source is incomplete or ambiguous.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Fabricated Citation Record

Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?

None located

No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.

No fabricated citation proceeding naming DiliTrust or its Lini engine was identified in the AI Hallucination Cases database as of October 16, 2026. Matches containing the letters in Lini referred to unrelated names and ordinary words, rather than this product. Most suite outputs concern agreements, board minutes and internal matter updates, where a mistaken detail may never produce a court citation incident. This result supplies no measured accuracy assurance and does not exclude other disputes or operational mistakes involving generated content.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence
Professional Responsibility

Bar Guidance Alignment

Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?

Not addressed

No located public material engages with bar or ethics guidance.

The governance framework discusses GDPR, the European AI Act, bias mitigation and human oversight. It does not name a bar opinion or connect particular controls to jurisdictional duties governing lawyers' competence, confidentiality, candor or client communication. Corporate governance obligations and professional conduct rules apply to different actors. Lawyers using proposed contract clauses or generated matter summaries therefore receive general supervision principles, without a vendor supplied mapping to the rules that govern their own engagement or professional status.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Billing and Fee Posture

Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?

Savings claims only

Public materials claim time savings without addressing billing or disclosure, and the product sits inside a fee relationship between a lawyer and a client where those savings would change the bill.

DiliTrust promotes reduced manual work and supplies ROI calculators for its suite and individual modules. Its stated customer audience includes law firms as well as corporate departments, so time savings can arise within a lawyer and client fee relationship. No mechanism allocates those savings to billable entries, adjusts invoices or explains AI charges to clients. Matter management tracks outside counsel spend and dispute costs, which is a different function from an AI billing disclosure process or a client facing account of automated work.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness

Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?

Disclosure pack published

A subprocessor and model provider list plus client facing disclosure material is published or available without an agreement in place.

An AI Code of Conduct, a security sheet and downloadable ISO certificates provide materials that legal teams can share during a client technology review. They describe local processing, model development, global model training restrictions and security controls. Customers may also connect their own models, which changes the configuration requiring review. The website privacy notice lists business service providers, but no complete production subprocessor schedule covers hosting, monitoring and support. A client specific approval workflow or automated mapping to outside counsel guidelines is not included.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence

Court Disclosure Support

If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?

Partial record

Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.

Risk Detector leaves highlighted source clauses and tracked suggestions for human review, while the suite maintains activity and change logs. These supply parts of a reconstruction of contract work, and signed files have their own completion certificate. No per-file export combines the model version, prompt, retrieved sources, generated passages and reviewer approval into an AI disclosure history. Board minutes and QuickView updates may be shared after editing, but no tribunal or regulator declaration identifies which portions originated with Lini.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 16, 2026Evidence
Contact

Correct a record, or ask how something was graded

Every grade and every signal on this index is drawn from public sources and dated. If a record is wrong, out of date, or missing an artifact the index did not locate, send the source and it will be reviewed and the record redated. Vendors are welcome to submit documentation. Nothing on this index is for sale, including a listing, a placement, or a grade.

AI Legal Index

The AI Legal Index is an independent index that tracks changes to AI vendors in legal. It holds 462 vendors across 9 categories, each graded on the same 15 capability axes and recorded against 12 legal signals, from public sources. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
October 21, 2026
The AI Legal Index is an editorial reference. It is not a regulatory body, not a law firm, and nothing published here is legal advice or a recommendation to retain or avoid a vendor. Records are verified against published sources, bar guidance and public court records. Where a record reads not addressed, the material was not located in public sources on the date shown. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Legal Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746