Sovereign European infrastructure for Digital Platforms and SaaS

What problems are currently confronting the cloud strategies of ISVs and SaaS providers?

In June 2026, the EU Commission provisionally classified AWS and Microsoft Azure as gatekeepers under the Digital Markets Act for the first time. This is the first expansion of the DMA to cloud infrastructure. At the same time, the switching obligations of the EU Data Act, applicable since September 2025, structurally reduce the costs of switching providers. For ISVs, there is a third point: anyone who advertises themselves with "EU-hosted" and sovereignty towards their own customers needs a credible foundation for this.

What does the DMA gatekeeper classification of AWS and Azure mean for your cloud strategy?

For platform operators currently running on one or two hyperscalers, this is a regulatory signal to seriously consider multi-cloud diversification, not just a compliance detail. With Yorizon, you strategically complement your portfolio to existing hyperscaler contracts.

How can SaaS providers credibly prove "EU-hosted" to their customers?

Credibility is established through a verifiable legal jurisdiction and infrastructure location, not through marketing claims. Yorizon operates local edge data centers in Germany, such as YEXIO Heiligenhaus, under German and EU law, without access capabilities under the US CLOUD Act. An ISV hosting on this infrastructure can pass on the same proof of sovereignty to its customers that it receives itself.

What does the Data Act switching obligation actually mean for existing cloud infrastructure?

Since September 2025, the EU Data Act has required interoperability and switching mechanisms for cloud services. The goal: to facilitate provider switching technically and contractually. For ISVs, this means that switching costs, which previously served as an argument against a multi-cloud strategy, are falling structurally. Yorizon is built on OpenStack with open APIs. Portability is therefore planned from the outset, not added as an afterthought.

How do we migrate a multi-tenant SaaS platform without risking availability for our end customers?

Yorizon recommends a workload-based entry instead of a complete migration: first move individual, clearly defined components, such as dev/staging environments or part of the object storage load. The production platform only follows after proven operation. A technical workload assessment prior to migration shows which components are suitable first with low risk.

Is bare-metal infrastructure sufficient for our scaling requirements, or do we need a hyperscaler?

That depends on the workload. For multi-tenant production operations, CI/CD pipelines, high-volume object storage, and bare-metal GPU for AI features, the fit is high. For highly fluctuating, sporadic peak loads, a hyperscaler often remains the more economical complement. Yorizon does not act as a complete replacement, but rather as a sovereign complement for those workloads where data residency and exit capability are the deciding factors.