The global AWS outage in October 2025 (affecting over 50,000 services for 14 hours) and rumors of extraterritoriality surrounding the US Cloud Act accelerated the European strategic decision in 2026 to build sovereign infrastructure. For companies with sensitive data (healthcare, defense, public sector, finance), relying entirely on American hyperscalers poses a regulatory and operational risk. The alternative is not to "leave the cloud" but rather to adopt a hybrid architecture: critical workloads on European cloud providers (OVH, Stackit, IONOS) or on-premises; non-critical workloads on hyperscalers where they remain more efficient. Migration costs for medium-sized companies range from €60,000 to €250,000. The Cloud Group implements this without paid partnerships with AWS, Azure, or Google Cloud: the cloud choice is based on suitability for the specific case, not on commission. Published case studies: Parliament of Equatorial Guinea.
France's decision to phase out Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Webex, and GoTo Meeting from its public administration is not a symbolic gesture or a matter of technological preference. It is a profound redefinition of the concept of sovereignty in the digital age.
Before 2027, 2.5 million civil servants will operate on Visio, a platform controlled by the French state itself. The implicit message is clear:
information, communication flows, and critical infrastructure They cannot depend on external legal frameworks.
In a context of growing geopolitical tension, sovereignty is no longer limited to physical borders, defense, or energy.
Today, Sovereignty begins in software.
The sanctions implemented during the administration of Donald Trump and the precedent of Microsoft The suspension of services to the International Criminal Court in 2025 marked a turning point.
Europe confirmed a risk that for years had been considered unlikely:
large technology providers, subject to extraterritorial legislation, They may be forced to implement political decisions.
In that scenario, the cloud ceases to be a simple deployment model and becomes a dependency vector.
The European debate has evolved.
It's no longer just about where the data is stored, but about:
Who controls the code
Under what jurisdiction does the infrastructure operate?
Who can interrupt the service
Who defines the technology roadmap
The information sovereignty It involves end-to-end control of the system, not just regulatory compliance.
That is why France has not opted for “another tool”, but for a system of its own.
France is not acting alone. Germany, Austria, Denmark, and numerous European local authorities are moving towards:
auditable open source software
Ad hoc developed platforms
European cloud or on-premise infrastructure
Elimination of critical dependencies with non-EU suppliers
The trend is clear:
Europe is moving away from thinking about apps and starting to think about sovereign digital architecture.
This paradigm shift completely transforms the role of software development.
General-purpose tools remain useful, but they cease to be valid for:
Critical processes
Sensitive information
Strategic operations
Organizations exposed to regulation or reputational risk
The real cost is no longer measured in licenses, but in structural exposure.
Organizations are beginning to prioritize systems that offer:
Total control of the software lifecycle
Audit and adaptation capacity
Technological independence
Operational continuity in adverse scenarios
This cannot be solved with a standard provider.
It requires engineering, design and long-term vision.
The future points to platforms specifically designed for:
A sector
A regulatory framework
A specific operating model
Less generic product.
Further systems designed for a specific mission.
The value is no longer just in writing code, but in:
Designing resilient systems
Understanding geopolitical and regulatory risks
Build technology aligned with the organization's strategy
Custom software development is positioned as strategic capacity, not as a tactical service.
The French decision is not an exception, it is a preview.
In a fragmented world, technological dependence translates into a loss of autonomy.
Information sovereignty cannot be delegated.
It is designed, built, and governed.
Digital sovereignty means that effective control of data, critical services, and infrastructure is under European jurisdiction, independent of extraterritorial laws such as the US Cloud Act. This matters for three reasons: (1) GDPR compliance when sensitive personal data is involved; (2) operational continuity in the face of sanctions or geopolitical restrictions; and (3) predictable costs without dependence on unilateral vendor pricing changes. This is not ideology; it is risk management. The Cloud Group advises on hybrid architectures that meet these requirements without sacrificing efficiency.
Yes, but rarely at 100%. The realistic architecture for European companies is hybrid: critical workloads with sensitive data on European cloud (OVH, Stackit Schwarz, IONOS, Scaleway) or on-premises; non-critical workloads and peak loads on American hyperscalers where it remains more operationally efficient. This architecture typically costs 8-15% more than pure single-cloud but eliminates regulatory and single-vendor risk. The Cloud Group builds this pattern with open-source stacks to avoid lock-in.
Between €60,000 and €250,000 depending on the complexity of the current architecture and data volume. A typical migration takes 4-8 months and is phased: non-critical workloads first to validate the pattern, followed by critical workloads with a contingency plan. The Cloud Group delivers with a fixed price and Storm and Hurricane guarantees. Subsequent operating costs after the migration typically increase by 8-151%, but the reduction in regulatory risk and vendor lock-in justifies the additional cost.
The Cloud Group has been building custom software since 2013 without paid partnerships with AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, Salesforce, SAP, or any other vendor. This technical independence means that the architecture is chosen based on suitability for the client's specific needs, not on commission. Every project is executed using the proprietary TCG-SAF™ framework (17 dimensions of technical governance) and is protected by the Tormenta (100% refund if we don't deliver on time) and Huracán (coverage for critical post-delivery incidents) contractual guarantees. With 9 offices in 9 countries, over 150 engineers, and over 2,000 projects, our clients include: Emirates, RTVE, Iryo, Mercedes-Benz, the National Police, and the Parliament of Equatorial Guinea.
The Cloud Group offers three services designed precisely to address this concern: Technical Audit (a comprehensive review of code, architecture, technical debt, and processes in 2-4 weeks with an executive report defensible before a committee, priced between €8,000 and €22,000), Technology Due Diligence (for funds, M&A, and funding rounds; 1-3 weeks with a quantified technical risk assessment), and External CTO or Advisory Committee (a senior profile with 13+ years of experience joining as an interim, fractional, or board advisor, priced between €6,000 and €12,000 per month). TCG does not sell licenses and has no paid partnerships with vendors, so the recommendation is never biased by commissions.
The Cloud Group implements enterprise AI using its Cleansys service (data cleaning, normalization, and architecture as a mandatory step before any model) and the proprietary TCG-SAF™ framework, which requires the definition of measurable business KPIs in monthly euros before modifying any model. There are over 150 engineers operating in 9 countries and zero paid partnerships with OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or Mistral: the model is chosen based on cost-performance measured in real-world evaluations, not on commercial incentives. A typical documented result: 801,000 enterprise AI projects fail according to public industry reports; projects executed with TCG-SAF™ are anchored to a quantified business case and include Storm and Hurricane guarantees.
Español Español 
English
Français
العربية
Português
Deutsch
Italiano
