Make risk specific
A general ban on “sensitive data” does not tell employees how to work. Useful governance defines information classes, roles, permitted tasks and ownership when an answer is wrong or an incident occurs.
Protect each boundary
Review identity, documents, model requests, integrations and administrative access. Instructions hidden inside source documents and attempts to retrieve information beyond a user’s permissions deserve particular attention.
- Least privilege and checks before retrieval.
- Multifactor authentication for privileged access.
- Audit significant events without unnecessary copies of sensitive content.
Turn assessment into operating controls
The assessment produces data-flow maps, abuse scenarios, a prioritised remediation plan and acceptance criteria. One illustrative test checks that an employee cannot retrieve passages from another department’s restricted archive. This is a test scenario, not a guarantee that vulnerabilities are absent.
Reassess meaningful changes
A new model, source or integration changes risk. Maintain regression checks and change approvals. Technical safeguards can support compliance work; they are not certification or legal assessment.
The information flow
- Identity
- Policy
- Permitted context
- Audit
Models and documents run on your infrastructure. Network policies determine permitted connections.
Practical questions
Does this guarantee GDPR compliance?
No. Compliance also depends on purpose, lawful basis, contracts and organisational processes. Those require a separate qualified review.
Is a local model sufficient?
No. Local systems can still have incorrect permissions, vulnerabilities, unsafe integrations and monitoring gaps.