Your context under Me is readable only by you. That includes administrators and owners. No role in Riktra opens someone else’s private notes, and the database refuses it regardless of what the application asks for.
Your AI sees your private context in your own conversations, and never in anyone else’s.
What “no admin bypass” means
Most products that promise this implement it as a permission check somewhere in the application. A missed check, a new endpoint, a helpful debugging tool, and the promise quietly stops being true.
In Riktra, personal_context and focus_items are owner-scoped at the database level: a row is visible only when it belongs to the person asking. There is no elevated role that reads around it. The retrieval path that assembles company context for an AI does not include private records at all, and neither do logs or analytics.
This is the guarantee Riktra would be most damaged by breaking, so it is the one asserted by tests rather than documented. A change that exposed private context to a co-worker would fail CI before it could be merged.
The anti-surveillance boundary
Riktra does not show managers what individuals are doing, and it never will. It is not an oversight tool that happens to have a privacy setting; the absence of that capability is a design constraint.
The practical consequence: there is no view, export, or tool anywhere in the product that aggregates one person’s activity for someone else to read.
What is shared, then?
Everything you deliberately put into company context — goals, decisions, priorities, responsibilities, open questions, working principles. That material is organization-readable by design, which is exactly why the private half has to be airtight. A single store where the boundary is a matter of judgment would end up trusted for neither purpose.