Digital Sovereignty as a Strategic Asset for Open Finance

Estimated reading time: 5 minutes · Last updated: 6 October 2026

Digital sovereignty is the decision-making control organisations keep over the software, infrastructure, operations and security that underpin open finance. Javier Cordero, vice president and general manager at Red Hat, argues that this control — not just where data is stored — will determine whether banks and fintechs can sustain interoperable, resilient payment rails and services. His column says adopting open technologies and retaining the ability to change providers, audit components and adapt to rules is a business variable, not only an IT choice, as first reported by Mexico Business News.

Why digital sovereignty changes the open finance equation

Digital sovereignty, as Javier Cordero presents it, goes beyond data residency: it is about who makes decisions over the software, infrastructure and operations that run critical financial services. That shift matters because open finance depends on systems that interconnect banks, fintechs and third parties without building hidden, hard-to-exit dependencies.

The practical implication is business-level: the ability to switch providers, move workloads, audit technology components or adapt a platform to new regulatory requirements becomes part of continuity planning and competitive positioning. This reframes choices such as whether to rely on a single closed vendor or to adopt open technologies that preserve options.

The Bank for International Settlements' emphasis on open standards and interoperability reinforces the point that technical design choices cascade into market structure. For institutions weighing new payment rails or API programmes, the core question is how much decision-making power they want to retain over the technology that supports their services.

Open source as a lever for choice and auditability

The essay argues that open source's value lies not in price alone but in the ability to study, modify and develop code collaboratively. For financial organisations, that means greater transparency about how a platform behaves and the option to integrate or replace components without being entirely bound to a single provider.

That does not remove the need for support, security, maintenance, integration and specialised talent; the author is explicit that enterprise software still requires those services. Instead, open technologies shift where the power to choose resides: between a single vendor dictating the product roadmap and an institution able to engage different suppliers or an internal team to meet its needs.

Red Hat's analysis of digital sovereignty in banking is cited to show that many banks are reassessing reliance on specific infrastructure providers and moving toward hybrid and multicloud architectures to keep flexibility and resilience.

Operational choices that determine resilience

Account-to-account payments are used as an example: instant transfers that reduce intermediaries can lower friction and expand access, but their long-term benefit depends on the underlying architecture. If the rails are built on platforms an institution cannot adapt or audit, interoperability can be fragile.

Operational sovereignty includes the capacity to move workloads, to run parts of the stack in different environments, and to meet new security or regulatory requirements quickly. The article highlights provider disruptions and regulatory changes as concrete risks that make the ability to change or inspect technology an operational imperative.

For many institutions, that drives architectural decisions: hybrid deployments, multicloud strategies and adherence to open standards so that new services can be added without recreating dependencies that limit future strategic moves.

What markets such as Mexico should prioritise

The piece specifically calls out Mexico's open finance development needs: banks, fintechs, technology firms and regulators must build interoperable, secure infrastructure that can evolve. The business question shifts from 'what technology can we adopt?' to 'how much decision-making power will we retain over that technology?'

That choice will affect resilience against provider disruptions, the ability to comply with new security requirements and the capacity to incorporate technological transformations such as artificial intelligence. The author recommends designing programmes that preserve options rather than locking participants into a single vendor's trajectory.

Taken together, the recommendation for Mexico is pragmatic: participation in global open finance ecosystems should be pursued from a position of control — enough control to switch providers, audit components and adapt platforms as regulations and market opportunities change.

Outlook for open finance and digital sovereignty

The bottom line

Digital sovereignty will shape how open finance develops by tying technical design to business resilience. Keeping the ability to change providers, audit components and move workloads matters for operations, compliance and innovation. Open source and open standards provide tools to preserve those options, but they come with commitments to support, security and talent. For markets such as Mexico, the choice is not between isolation and openness but between participating from a position of control or accepting technological constraints that could limit future strategy.

What to watch

• Watch for regulators' interoperability guidance in Mexico and internationally; no date has been set.
• Watch banks' and fintechs' migration plans toward hybrid and multicloud architectures; no date has been set.