Secure use of AI
Your people already use AI, whether you have it under control or not. They paste text into a chatbot, try generative AI assistants, upload documents to have them summarized. The risk is not in the tool, it is in what gets given to it without thinking: customer data, code, confidential information that leaves your control in one click. Security in the use of AI brings order to that: it discovers which tools are really used, prevents sensitive information from escaping towards them and sets clear rules of use, so that artificial intelligence adds value without becoming a leak.
Secure use of AI in your company, managed, across all of Spain.
Why
The problem is not artificial intelligence, it is using it without thinking about what gets given to it. And that already happens in your company, whether you know it or not.
With permission or without it, AI is already part of your team's day to day. Shadow AI is not the future, it is the present.
Pasting customer data or code into a public chatbot can mean taking it out of your control forever.
How many AI tools touch your data today is a question almost no one can answer.
Blocking it outright does not stop the use, it only hides it and makes it more dangerous. Better to bring order to it.
What is included
To make the most of generative AI without it being a hole, three things are needed: knowing what is used, setting rules and preventing sensitive data from escaping.
See which AI tools are really used in your company, the approved ones and the ones that are not.
Keep sensitive information from leaving towards AI tools, just as it is watched in email.
Simple rules on what can and cannot be given to AI, easy to understand and follow.
Govern what data the integrated assistants access, like Copilot, so they do not expose too much.
Follow how AI is used and warn when something goes outside what was agreed.
So the team knows what is safe to give to AI and what is not, because the final decision is theirs.
The approach
You cannot protect what you cannot see, and AI risks start precisely in what you do not control. That is why the first thing is to discover which AI tools are already used and what data touches them. With that picture, clear rules are set, neither a flat no that no one follows nor a free-for-all, and the control is put in place that prevents sensitive information from escaping towards them.
From there it is continuous monitoring, the same that our SOC operates, Sondriva: following how AI is used, adjusting the rules when new tools appear and warning when something goes outside what was expected.
Ban or govern
There are two reactions to AI. One scares the problem away without solving it; the other puts it in your favor.
AI is blocked by internal memo and that is that. The use does not stop, it hides: people reach for their phone or personal accounts, and now you neither see it nor control it. The risk remains, but in the dark.
You accept that AI is used, you give a safe way to do it and you set limits where they matter. It is the governance of AI use: people make the most of the tool, you keep control and the data does not escape.
Not to be confused
AI security appears in several places in our catalog, and it is worth not confusing them, because each one solves something different. ISO 42001 certifies that you have an AI management system in order. The AI Act is about complying with the European regulation when you develop or use high-risk AI. And AI and LLM pentesting attacks your models to see if they break.
This page is about the everyday: that your people use artificial intelligence without a piece of data escaping or a risk getting in. The four complement each other, but this is the practical one, the one that prevents the scare while the others certify, comply and test.
When
The team uses chatbots and assistants daily and there is no rule or anyone watching what gets given to them.
Customer data, code or confidential information passes through your hands and cannot end up in a public chatbot.
You want to deploy your own AI assistant or a Copilot and you need it not to expose data it should not.
The regulation or your own ISO 42001 asks you to demonstrate that the use of AI is under control.
Method
We see which AI tools are already used and what data touches them, the approved and the shadow AI.
We set clear rules of use, neither a no that no one follows nor a free-for-all, designed for your reality.
We put in place the control that prevents sensitive information from escaping towards AI tools.
We follow how it is used, adjust when new tools appear and train your people.
Fits with
Protecting the use of AI shares mechanisms with email security, because both are about keeping sensitive data from escaping, and it is operated by the same continuous monitoring of our SOC, Sondriva. The people side is reinforced by awareness, because in the end whoever decides what to give to AI is someone on the team.
And it leans on the formal side: ISO 42001 and the AI Act set the framework, and AI and LLM pentesting tests the models. This is the part that protects real use, where things actually happen.
Questions
Shadow AI is the use of artificial intelligence tools by your people without the company knowing or controlling it, like pasting information into a public chatbot. The risk is that sensitive data leaves your control without anyone noticing.
No. Banning them outright, whether ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot or Gemini, does not stop the use, it hides it and makes it more dangerous. The idea is to put it in order: know what is used, set clear rules on what can and cannot be given to it, and prevent sensitive data from escaping. That way you make the most of AI without exposing yourself.
No, they are different things that complement each other. ISO 42001 certifies that you have an AI management system in order, the AI Act is about complying with the European regulation, and AI pentesting attacks your models. This page is about protecting day-to-day use, so your people use AI without leaking data.
Yes. When you integrate an AI assistant into your company, you have to govern what data it accesses and what it can do with it, so it does not expose information to the wrong people. That is part of protecting the use of AI.
With the same ideas as the prevention of data leakage in email: you define what sensitive information is and watch that it does not leave towards AI tools, warning or blocking when someone tries to send it.
Yes. In fact it is where it is needed most, because people already use AI on their own and there is usually no one bringing order. It adapts to the size and to the tools you really use.
Shall we bring order to your AI?
Tell us how you use AI today and what data you handle, and we will propose how to make the most of it without it turning into a leak.
Get in touch