Para empresas que querem crescer com controle

Um sistema para operar sua empresa com IA.

Vendas, marketing, atendimento, operação, financeiro e inteligência trabalhando sobre o mesmo contexto — para sua empresa ganhar escala sem perder controle.

Sua empresa inteira. Uma operação. IA trabalhando.

Ver a Centriu funcionando

Para empresas de qualquer setor que querem crescer com estrutura, controle e inteligência.

Representação ilustrativa do trabalho em execução

O problema

Sua empresa não deveria operar em pedaços

Não é falta de ferramenta. É que cada ferramenta resolve um pedaço, e ninguém é dono do todo. O custo disso não aparece numa fatura — aparece no mês seguinte.

Sistemas que não se falam
O mesmo dado é digitado de novo — e cada cópia conta uma história diferente.
Dados duplicados
Ninguém sabe qual versão é a verdadeira na hora de decidir.
Conversas perdidas
O cliente repete o contexto a cada canal e a cada pessoa.
Tarefas espalhadas
O trabalho vive em planilhas, mensagens e na memória de alguém.
Decisões sem contexto
A escolha é feita com o recorte que estava à mão, não com o que importava.
Automações desconectadas
Cada ferramenta automatiza um pedaço e ninguém enxerga o todo.

Nenhum desses problemas se resolve comprando mais um software. Eles se resolvem quando a operação inteira passa a trabalhar sobre o mesmo contexto.

A resposta

Tudo trabalha sobre o mesmo contexto.

A Centriu não é uma coleção de produtos. É uma plataforma em que clientes, áreas e agentes leem e escrevem no mesmo lugar.

Cliente 360

Um contexto, não vários cadastros

Cada conversa, tarefa, campanha, cobrança e decisão fica ligada ao cliente e à operação — não a um sistema isolado.

Clientes
Comercial
Atendimento
Operação
Financeiro
Marketing
Inteligência
Agentes
Consultoria

As áreas abaixo são partes da mesma operação, não produtos separados. Elas compartilham conta, permissões e histórico.

IA que trabalha — não um chatbot ao lado

A inteligência artificial da Centriu participa da operação: entende contexto, prepara trabalho, executa rotinas e pede aprovação quando importa.

Entende o contexto

Lê a operação, o cliente e o histórico antes de propor qualquer coisa.

Prepara o trabalho

Redige, organiza, calcula e deixa pronto para revisão humana.

Executa rotinas

Roda o que é repetitivo dentro dos limites definidos pela empresa.

Recomenda a próxima ação

Cruza áreas, identifica prioridade e mostra o motivo da recomendação.

Pede aprovação

O que é sensível passa por uma pessoa antes de valer. Sem exceção silenciosa.

Mantém histórico e aprende

Registra o que aconteceu e usa o resultado para melhorar a próxima decisão.

O que a Centriu faz

Uma plataforma, várias frentes de trabalho. Tudo no mesmo contexto, com a IA participando do que dá para acelerar.

Comercial

CRM, pipeline, oportunidades, propostas, follow-up e automações.

Atendimento

WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger, chat do site e e-mail no mesmo contexto.

Operação

Tarefas, responsáveis, prazos, aprovações, agenda e capacidade.

Financeiro

Contas, cobranças, caixa, fiscal, margem, IR, orçamento e inteligência econômica.

Marketing

Planejar, produzir, aprovar, publicar e medir conteúdo e campanhas.

Inteligência

Painéis, alertas, previsões, recomendações e leitura executiva.

Agentes

Rotinas executadas continuamente pela IA com controle e aprovação.

Consultoria

Diagnóstico, estratégia, transformação, acompanhamento e especialistas.

Para quem é

Para empresas que querem crescer — e crescer certo.

A Centriu faz sentido quando o volume aumenta e a estrutura precisa acompanhar. Não é sobre setor nem tamanho: é sobre a operação conseguir sustentar o próximo estágio.

As vendas crescem, mas o processo não acompanha.

As áreas trabalham separadas e o cliente sente.

A operação depende de pessoas específicas.

O financeiro ficou complexo e o caixa perde visibilidade.

O atendimento cresce em volume e em canais.

A IA entra sem contexto, controle ou histórico.

Se a empresa ainda não começou a crescer, a Centriu também ajuda a preparar a estrutura para o primeiro salto.

Ver a Centriu funcionando

Consultoria

Tecnologia sozinha não resolve uma operação mal desenhada.

A Centriu combina tecnologia, inteligência, método e acompanhamento. A consultoria diagnostica, desenha, implanta e acompanha — com evidências, não com apresentação.

Diagnóstico e imersão na operação

Estratégia e prioridades

Roadmap de transformação

Desenho da arquitetura operacional

Implantação conduzida

Acompanhamento com evidências

Benchmarking e leitura de mercado

Especialistas, rede e inteligência coletiva

A participação de especialistas depende da solução e do contrato. Não é um item incluído automaticamente em toda contratação, e não prometemos acompanhamento humano ilimitado.

Veja a Centriu funcionando na sua operação

Uma conversa para entender onde a sua operação perde tempo, dinheiro ou capacidade — e o que a Centriu faria primeiro.

Ver a Centriu funcionando

problema

LGPD Deletion Request Purge Scheduling Automation: Confirmed, and Never Actually Scheduled

Centriu Oracle lets a data subject request deletion of a project's data — a real right under Brazil's LGPD. The function handling that request, before this fix, replied to the caller with a confident, specific confirmation: the project archived, and a deletion scheduled for exactly 30 days later. Separately, the function's OWN source comment described persisting that intent to the database — a flag marking the deletion as pending, and the actual scheduled date — specifically so an independent, later-running purge job could find every project past its scheduled date and complete the deletion. The database write that actually ran did neither of those things: it updated only the project's phase to paused, never once writing the pending-deletion flag or the scheduled date the purge job's own query depends on to find the row in the first place. The 30-day date returned to the caller was computed by a separate line of code that ran AFTER the database write had already completed — meaning it was never even available to be included in that write to begin with. A data subject's genuine deletion request could receive a specific, confident confirmation of a schedule that was never actually placed anywhere the system's own automated purge process could ever find it — silently pending forever, with no error, unless someone happened to notice and intervene manually. Fixed by computing the 30-day scheduled date BEFORE the database write runs, and persisting the deletion intent, its request timestamp, and its scheduled date together in the exact same update that already archives the project.

Quero resolver isso

A confirmation is only true if the thing it confirms is actually findable later

Replying to a request with a specific, confident confirmation — "scheduled for 30 days from now" — is exactly the right thing to tell someone who has just exercised a real right. The entire truth of that confirmation depends on a SEPARATE, later process — here, an independent purge job checking on its own schedule — being able to actually find the specific record the confirmation was about, using whatever data was actually saved at the moment of the original request. A confirmation message computed and returned to a caller, and a database write persisting the state that confirmation describes, are two genuinely separate steps — and a system can get the FIRST one completely right, in isolation, while never actually performing the second one at all, with nothing in the response itself revealing the gap.

Replying to a request with a specific, confident confirmation — "scheduled for 30 days from now" — is exactly the right thing to tell someone who has just exercised a real right. The entire truth of that confirmation depends on a SEPARATE, later process — here, an independent purge job checking on its own schedule — being able to actually find the specific record the confirmation was about, using whatever data was actually saved at the moment of the original request. A confirmation message computed and returned to a caller, and a database write persisting the state that confirmation describes, are two genuinely separate steps — and a system can get the FIRST one completely right, in isolation, while never actually performing the second one at all, with nothing in the response itself revealing the gap.

Quero resolver isso

How a deletion that was confirmed, but never actually scheduled, was closed

Centriu Oracle handles a data subject's request to delete a project's data by first soft-archiving it — setting its phase to paused, taking it out of any active workflow — and, per the function's own documented design, is meant to separately persist the INTENT to delete: a flag marking the deletion as pending, and the specific date, 30 days out, by which the deletion should actually be carried out. That persisted intent exists specifically because the actual, permanent deletion does not happen inside this function at all — it is handled by a completely separate process, run on its own schedule (a cron job or a manual operations review), whose own logic selects every project where the pending-deletion flag is set AND the scheduled date has already passed.

Before this fix, the function's own code comment described exactly this design — persisting the pending flag and the scheduled date specifically for that later purge process to find. The actual database update that ran, immediately below that comment, wrote only `{ phase: "pausado" }` — the project's phase, and nothing else. Neither the pending-deletion flag nor the scheduled deletion date was included in that write at all. Separately, a few lines further down in the same function, a 30-day date WAS computed — `const scheduled = new Date(); scheduled.setDate(scheduled.getDate() + 30)` — and returned to the caller as part of a confident response: `{ archived: true, deletionScheduledAt: scheduled.toISOString() }`. Because this calculation happened AFTER the database update had already run and already completed, the computed date was never in scope to be included in that write, regardless of what the write itself contained — the caller received a specific, correctly-formatted 30-day date, and the database never recorded that date, or any indication a deletion was pending, anywhere at all.

The practical consequence: a data subject exercising a real right under Brazil's LGPD to have their project's data deleted would receive an entirely plausible, specific confirmation — their project archived, a deletion scheduled 30 days out — while the system's own separate purge process, which finds its work specifically by querying for the pending-deletion flag and an elapsed scheduled date, would never once find this project, because neither of the two fields its query depends on was ever actually set. The request was genuinely, permanently pending, in the sense that nothing about it had been forgotten or lost — but it was pending in a place no running process was ever configured to look, indefinitely, unless a person happened to separately notice and manually intervene.

The fix reorders and completes the write. The 30-day scheduled date is now computed FIRST, before any database write runs, so it is genuinely available to be persisted rather than computed too late to matter. The database update is expanded from the single `phase` field to include `pending_lgpd_deletion: true`, `deletion_requested_at` (the current timestamp, recording exactly when the request itself was made), and `deletion_scheduled_at` (the real, computed 30-day date) — all three written together, in the same single update that already archives the project's phase, rather than the deletion intent being described only in a comment while never actually reaching the database. The function's own return value is unchanged in shape, but now reports a schedule that the database genuinely, verifiably reflects — the same value returned to the caller is the exact value the system's own separate purge process will later use to find and complete the request.

Ver como funciona

What is actually built today

Centriu Oracle's project-deletion request persists a genuine pending-deletion flag, a request timestamp, and a computed 30-day scheduled deletion date, all in the same database write that archives the project.
The 30-day scheduled date is computed before the database write runs, so the exact value returned to the caller is the exact value genuinely persisted — not two independently-computed values that happened to look the same.
The system's own separate, independently-scheduled purge process, which selects projects by a pending flag and an elapsed scheduled date, can now genuinely find every project whose deletion has actually been requested — the two database fields its own query depends on are reliably present.
A data subject's confirmation of a scheduled deletion now corresponds to a real, findable, persisted record — not a plausible response describing an intention that was never actually written anywhere the rest of the system could act on.
The project's own audit log continues to retain a record of the archival action within the legally-required retention period, unaffected by this fix — this correction is scoped specifically to the pending-deletion scheduling fields the purge process depends on.

Conhecer os recursos

What changes operationally

Centriu Oracle's project-deletion request now persists a genuine, findable pending-deletion flag and scheduled date in the same database write that archives the project, closing a gap where a data subject's confirmed deletion request could be permanently invisible to the system's own separate, independently-scheduled purge process — confirmed to the requester, but never actually queued for the follow-through step that would complete it.

Centriu Oracle's project-deletion request now persists a genuine, findable pending-deletion flag and scheduled date in the same database write that archives the project, closing a gap where a data subject's confirmed deletion request could be permanently invisible to the system's own separate, independently-scheduled purge process — confirmed to the requester, but never actually queued for the follow-through step that would complete it.

Quero esses resultados

A confirmed 30-day schedule, findable by nothing (illustrative framing of the actual measured finding)

Before the fix, a data subject requesting deletion of their project's data inside Centriu Oracle would receive a specific, confident confirmation: "archived, scheduled for deletion in 30 days." The project's phase genuinely changed. The two fields the system's own separate purge process actually queries for — a pending-deletion flag and a scheduled date — were never written at all, meaning that process, running on its own schedule weeks later, would find nothing to act on for this specific project, silently, indefinitely, with no error anywhere. After the fix, the identical request persists both fields in the same write, and the purge process genuinely finds and completes the deletion once the real, persisted 30-day date has passed.

Conversar sobre meu caso

Como começar

Começar agora

Perguntas frequentes

Was any project actually deleted incorrectly because of this defect?

No — the defect was the opposite direction: a genuine deletion REQUEST could fail to ever actually be scheduled for the follow-through purge process, not an unintended deletion occurring.

Did the data subject receive a false confirmation?

The confirmation message itself was accurate in FORMAT (a specific 30-day date) but was not backed by a corresponding database write — the confirmation described a schedule that the system's own separate purge process could never actually find.

How does the automated purge process find requests to act on?

By querying for projects where a pending-deletion flag is set AND the scheduled deletion date has already passed — both of which are the exact two fields this fix now genuinely persists.

Why was the 30-day date computed after the database write in the original code?

The original code structure computed the archival write first, then calculated the return value afterward — meaning the date used in the response was never available at the moment the (incomplete) database write actually ran.

Can a deletion request from before this fix be recovered?

Not automatically — since the pending-deletion flag was never set for those requests, they are not distinguishable in the database from a project archived for an unrelated reason; a team with that concern would need its own manual review.

What does Centriu Oracle cost?

It is sold by subscription with a published starting price — exact current values are on the central pricing page.

Ainda tenho dúvida

See how Centriu Oracle actually schedules an LGPD deletion request

Quero resolver isso