Interface
Is the application local, self-hosted or vendor-hosted?
“Private alternative” can describe very different architectures: a local interface using a cloud model, a desktop application with local inference, or a fully self-hosted stack with controlled storage and retrieval. Those configurations should not receive the same privacy evaluation.
General-purpose private AI assistance for professionals who need explicit control over data location, inference and hardware.
Is the application local, self-hosted or vendor-hosted?
Where can prompts, files, history, embeddings and logs be stored or transmitted?
Is inference local or external, and does that satisfy the required privacy boundary?
Does the configuration match the actual task and available hardware rather than merely being popular?
Comparing product names instead of concrete configuration profiles.
Using “open source” or “self-hosted” as a substitute for checking the inference endpoint.
Choosing the largest model without accounting for quantization, context and runtime overhead.
Hard constraints win: mandatory privacy, platform, hardware or license requirements exclude incompatible configurations instead of merely lowering their rank.
These configurations are evidence-backed launch references. They illustrate different privacy and hardware trade-offs; they are not universal recommendations.
Khoj + Ollama + Gemma 3 12B IT (QAT/int4 profile)
Open WebUI + llama.cpp + Qwen3-4B
AnythingLLM + Ollama + Gemma 3 12B IT (QAT/int4 profile)
Privacy is configuration-aware. STACKELIER separates application location, data location and inference location and evaluates the actual deployment profile.
No. It can still use external inference or other external services, so the complete data path must be checked.
No. MVP ranking is deterministic and prioritizes task fit, privacy fit, hardware fit, professional fit, complexity, cost fit and evidence confidence.