docs(blog): update enterprise

[icecrasher321]

Content update to apps/sim/content/blog/enterprise: Targeted FAQ refresh, not a full rewrite. Keep the URL, main article, screenshots, headings, and documentation links intact. A replacement article IS supplied below; it is the existing article with the opening paragraph and FAQ section updated — apply it as the post's content, but treat the changes below as the authoritative intent and do not drop or restructure any existing main-body section, image, or documentation link that the replacement article still contains.

1. Replace only the existing FAQ section. Replace everything from ## FAQ to the end of the article. The procurement questions come first, in this order: (1) SOC 2 report availability, (2) security-review process, (3) SLAs and dedicated support, (4) VPC or on-premises deployment, (5) data residency, (6) version rollback, (7) budget caps and spend tracking, (8) BYOK and data routing, (9) on-premises Copilot, (10) SSO and deprovisioning. Each answer starts with a direct response such as "Yes," "No," or "Sim provides…", with the remaining sentences explaining the answer using facts already documented elsewhere on the page. Per this repo's rules these Q&As live in frontmatter faq only — no ## FAQ heading in the body.

2. Add a dedicated security-review question. The existing question about restricting providers and integrations does not directly answer how procurement teams can review Sim. Add this question: "What does Sim provide for an enterprise security review?" Its answer must start with: "Sim provides its SOC 2 Type II report under NDA, penetration test reports, architecture documentation, and completed security questionnaires for enterprise security reviews." Then mention SSO, permission groups, data-retention configuration, BYOK, and self-hosting as controls that can be evaluated during the review. Place it second, after the SOC 2 question, per the ordering above.

3. Keep unsupported answers transparent. Do not imply Sim offers features the article does not document. For SLAs and dedicated support, state that terms are confirmed during the enterprise evaluation — do not invent uptime commitments, response times, or support tiers. For budget caps, state that the page does not document numeric per-team caps or a team-level spending dashboard, and explain that administrators can restrict model providers and features through permission groups while BYOK customers can use provider-side spending controls. For data residency, explain that customers can choose their infrastructure region through self-hosting and select provider configurations through BYOK — do not claim a formal residency guarantee for Sim's hosted service.

4. Small optional improvement: the opening paragraph is replaced with a short procurement-focused summary (already reflected in the supplied article). No other main-body sections need to be removed or rewritten.

• I confirm that I have read and agree to the terms outlined in the Contributor License Agreement (CLA)

[icecrasher321]

@cubic review

[icecrasher321]

@greptile

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated
docs	Skipped		Sep 19, 2026 5:24am UTC

[cubic-dev-ai]

@cubic review

@icecrasher321 I have started the AI code review. It will take a few minutes to complete.

[cubic-dev-ai]

No issues found across 1 file

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

_{Re-trigger cubic}

[cubic-dev-ai]

No issues found across 1 file

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

_{Re-trigger cubic}

[greptile-apps]

Confidence Score: 5/5

The documentation update appears safe to merge, with no outstanding correctness or repository-rule issues identified.

Summary

The PR refreshes the enterprise article’s procurement-focused introduction and FAQ while preserving the main article structure and documentation links.

• Adds the requested security-review FAQ and procurement-oriented question ordering.
• Clarifies limitations around hosted data residency, budget controls, BYOK routing, on-premises Copilot, and SSO offboarding.
• Aligns readingTime with the structured timeRequired metadata.
• Adds related enterprise procurement resources to the closing section.

_{Reviews (2) · Last reviewed commit: "Pi Babysit: address PR #8002 feedback"}

[icecrasher321]

@cubic review

[icecrasher321]

@greptile

[cubic-dev-ai]

@cubic review

@icecrasher321 I have started the AI code review. It will take a few minutes to complete.

[cubic-dev-ai]

No issues found across 1 file

Confidence score: 5/5

• Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
• No files require special attention.

_{Re-trigger cubic}