Skip to main content

GenAI in the Enterprise: Why Data Security Is at Risk

Todd Thorsen
CrashPlan

Enterprise data sprawl — vast amounts of critical information scattered across endpoints and siloed within SaaS applications — already challenges companies' ability to protect and back up their data. Much of this information is never fully secured, leaving organizations vulnerable. Now, as generative AI (GenAI) platforms emerge as yet another environment where enterprise data is consumed, transformed, and created, this fragmentation is set to intensify. Without effective data governance, large swaths of corporate information may not be backed up at all. Instead, that data could be uploaded to external GenAI systems, putting sensitive information and intellectual property at risk and amplifying the already formidable complexities of data protection.

 

Image
Crashplan

 

Use of Unregulated GenAI Spikes

GenAI platforms have increased in popularity, and enterprises need help to control how their employees interact with them. New data shows that 72% of workers who uploaded data to GenAI platforms did so without employers providing licenses. The same study found that 65% of organizations lack clear policies on using data with or from AI platforms. Experimenting with GenAI raises security concerns at the employee and employer levels.

For example, the US Patent and Trademark Office banned the use of GenAI tools last year due to security concerns with the technology and some of these tools exhibiting unpredictable behaviors. While there is a ban on using platforms like ChatGPT for work purposes, USPTO employees can use "state-of-the-art generative AI models" only inside the agency's internal test environment.

While this might be considered a cautious approach, it indicates how workplaces will likely evaluate how they implement and interact with GenAI platforms.

Unregulated GenAI Use Comes with Security Risks

The rapid adoption of GenAI tools has raised concerns about data privacy and security within organizations. But what exactly are these risks, and what implications can companies face?

  • Data breaches: AI tools may not have sufficient security controls in place which can lead to exposure of sensitive or proprietary data to malicious actors.
  • Intellectual property theft: Any data uploaded to GenAI platforms is stored and can be used to train the models, leaving IP and trade secrets in the public domain.
  • Regulatory violations: Depending on the data involved, geography and industry regulations like GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA can come into play, meaning there are strict data governance regulations. Non-compliance of these can result in fines or legal action.

Using unregulated GenAI can have severe consequences, which re-emphasizes the need for clear guidelines, ethical safeguards, and responsible deployment to ensure companies and employees benefit from these technologies while managing the associated risks.

Addressing the Risks of GenAI

Responsible governance requires a combination of technology, policy, education, and collaboration to foster a culture of responsible innovation and allow enterprises to minimize risks. So, what can companies do to ensure their data is protected? Develop actionable plans that include:

  • Clear GenAI policies: Establish guidelines for how GenAI platforms can be used, including approved cases. Prohibit sensitive or proprietary data from being uploaded and implement an approval process for using GenAI tools. Enterprises must define how they expect employees to use these platforms.
  • Licensed access: Ensure employees can access and use licensed GenAI tools vetted for security and compliance purposes. This provides greater control over the types of platforms being used by employees.
  • Data security training: Whether it's periodic training or in-the-moment reminders, employees need to be educated about the implications of leveraging an unregulated GenAI platform and using company data. Since these platforms use data to train their models, safeguarding IP and sensitive data is crucial.
  • Track GenAI activity: Organizations can monitor and manage how employees interact with GenAI platforms and look for red flags like high-volume uploads or using unapproved tools.

Uploading sensitive company data to unapproved third-party GenAI platforms can leave companies vulnerable to many consequences and potential regulatory violations. Organizations must establish policies and appropriately vet tools to help minimize risk and ensure responsible use.

As GenAI accelerates the creation and dispersion of enterprise data, the risks of data sprawl and insufficient backups increase dramatically. If left unmanaged, GenAI usage could lead to critical corporate information living outside secure ecosystems — never fully backed up, difficult to govern, and vulnerable to theft or misuse. By implementing robust policies, ensuring licensed and controlled platform access, providing ongoing employee education, and maintaining visibility into GenAI interactions, enterprises can still harness the innovative power of these tools. In doing so, they not only mitigate data security and compliance risks but also ensure that data, no matter where it resides, remains protected, integral, and usable for driving sustainable business value.

Todd Thorsen is Chief Information Security Officer at CrashPlan

The Latest

For years, production operations teams have treated alert fatigue as a quality-of-life problem: something that makes on-call rotations miserable but isn't considered a direct contributor to outages. That framing doesn't capture how these systems fail, and we now have data to show why. More importantly, it's now clear alert fatigue is a symptom of a deeper issue: production systems have outgrown the current operational approaches ...

I was on a customer call last fall when an enterprise architect said something I haven't been able to shake. Her team had just spent four months trying to swap one AI vendor for another. The original plan said three weeks. "We didn't switch vendors," she told me. "We rebuilt half our integrations and discovered what we'd actually been depending on." Most enterprise leaders don't expect that to be the experience ...

Ask any senior SRE or platform engineer what keeps them up at night, and the answer probably isn't the monitoring tool — it's the data feeding it. The proliferation of APM, observability, and AIOps platforms has created a telemetry sprawl problem that most teams manage reactively rather than architect proactively. Metrics are going to one platform. Traces routed somewhere else. Logs duplicated across multiple backends because nobody wants to be caught without them when something breaks. Every redundant stream costs money ...

80% of respondents agree that the IT role is shifting from operators to orchestrators, according to the 2026 IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous IT from SolarWinds ...

40% of organizations deploying AI will implement dedicated AI observability tools by 2028 to monitor model performance, bias and outputs, according to Gartner ...

Until AI-powered engineering tools have live visibility of how code behaves at runtime, they cannot be trusted to autonomously ensure reliable systems, according to the State of AI-Powered Engineering Report 2026 report from Lightrun. The report reveals that a major volume of manual work is required when AI-generated code is deployed: 43% of AI-generated code requires manual debugging in production, even after passing QA or staging tests. Furthermore, an average of three manual redeploy cycles are required to verify a single AI-suggested code fix in production ...

Many organizations describe AI as strategic, but they do not manage it strategically. When AI plans are disconnected from strategy, detached from organizational learning, and protected from serious assumptions testing, the problem is no longer technical immaturity; it is a failure of management discipline ... Executives too often tell organizations to "use AI" before they define what AI is supposed to change. The problem deepens in organizations where strategy isn't well articulated in the first place ...

Across the enterprise technology landscape, a quiet crisis is playing out. Organizations have run hundreds, sometimes thousands, of generative AI pilots. Leadership has celebrated the proof of concept (POCs) ... Industry experience points to a sobering reality: only 5-10% of AI POCs that progress to the pilot stage successfully reach scaled production. The remaining 90% fail because the enterprise environment around them was never ready to absorb them, not the AI models ...

Today's modern systems are not what they once were. Organizations now rely on distributed systems, event-driven workflows, hybrid and multi-cloud environments and continuous delivery pipelines. While each adds flexibility, it also introduces new, often invisible failures. Development speed is no longer the primary bottleneck of innovation. Reliability is ...

Seeing is believing, or in this case, seeing is understanding, according to New Relic's 2025 Observability Forecast for Retail and eCommerce report. Retailers who want to provide exceptional customer experiences while improving IT operations efficiency are leaning on observability ... Here are five key takeaways from the report ...

GenAI in the Enterprise: Why Data Security Is at Risk

Todd Thorsen
CrashPlan

Enterprise data sprawl — vast amounts of critical information scattered across endpoints and siloed within SaaS applications — already challenges companies' ability to protect and back up their data. Much of this information is never fully secured, leaving organizations vulnerable. Now, as generative AI (GenAI) platforms emerge as yet another environment where enterprise data is consumed, transformed, and created, this fragmentation is set to intensify. Without effective data governance, large swaths of corporate information may not be backed up at all. Instead, that data could be uploaded to external GenAI systems, putting sensitive information and intellectual property at risk and amplifying the already formidable complexities of data protection.

 

Image
Crashplan

 

Use of Unregulated GenAI Spikes

GenAI platforms have increased in popularity, and enterprises need help to control how their employees interact with them. New data shows that 72% of workers who uploaded data to GenAI platforms did so without employers providing licenses. The same study found that 65% of organizations lack clear policies on using data with or from AI platforms. Experimenting with GenAI raises security concerns at the employee and employer levels.

For example, the US Patent and Trademark Office banned the use of GenAI tools last year due to security concerns with the technology and some of these tools exhibiting unpredictable behaviors. While there is a ban on using platforms like ChatGPT for work purposes, USPTO employees can use "state-of-the-art generative AI models" only inside the agency's internal test environment.

While this might be considered a cautious approach, it indicates how workplaces will likely evaluate how they implement and interact with GenAI platforms.

Unregulated GenAI Use Comes with Security Risks

The rapid adoption of GenAI tools has raised concerns about data privacy and security within organizations. But what exactly are these risks, and what implications can companies face?

  • Data breaches: AI tools may not have sufficient security controls in place which can lead to exposure of sensitive or proprietary data to malicious actors.
  • Intellectual property theft: Any data uploaded to GenAI platforms is stored and can be used to train the models, leaving IP and trade secrets in the public domain.
  • Regulatory violations: Depending on the data involved, geography and industry regulations like GDPR, HIPAA, and CCPA can come into play, meaning there are strict data governance regulations. Non-compliance of these can result in fines or legal action.

Using unregulated GenAI can have severe consequences, which re-emphasizes the need for clear guidelines, ethical safeguards, and responsible deployment to ensure companies and employees benefit from these technologies while managing the associated risks.

Addressing the Risks of GenAI

Responsible governance requires a combination of technology, policy, education, and collaboration to foster a culture of responsible innovation and allow enterprises to minimize risks. So, what can companies do to ensure their data is protected? Develop actionable plans that include:

  • Clear GenAI policies: Establish guidelines for how GenAI platforms can be used, including approved cases. Prohibit sensitive or proprietary data from being uploaded and implement an approval process for using GenAI tools. Enterprises must define how they expect employees to use these platforms.
  • Licensed access: Ensure employees can access and use licensed GenAI tools vetted for security and compliance purposes. This provides greater control over the types of platforms being used by employees.
  • Data security training: Whether it's periodic training or in-the-moment reminders, employees need to be educated about the implications of leveraging an unregulated GenAI platform and using company data. Since these platforms use data to train their models, safeguarding IP and sensitive data is crucial.
  • Track GenAI activity: Organizations can monitor and manage how employees interact with GenAI platforms and look for red flags like high-volume uploads or using unapproved tools.

Uploading sensitive company data to unapproved third-party GenAI platforms can leave companies vulnerable to many consequences and potential regulatory violations. Organizations must establish policies and appropriately vet tools to help minimize risk and ensure responsible use.

As GenAI accelerates the creation and dispersion of enterprise data, the risks of data sprawl and insufficient backups increase dramatically. If left unmanaged, GenAI usage could lead to critical corporate information living outside secure ecosystems — never fully backed up, difficult to govern, and vulnerable to theft or misuse. By implementing robust policies, ensuring licensed and controlled platform access, providing ongoing employee education, and maintaining visibility into GenAI interactions, enterprises can still harness the innovative power of these tools. In doing so, they not only mitigate data security and compliance risks but also ensure that data, no matter where it resides, remains protected, integral, and usable for driving sustainable business value.

Todd Thorsen is Chief Information Security Officer at CrashPlan

The Latest

For years, production operations teams have treated alert fatigue as a quality-of-life problem: something that makes on-call rotations miserable but isn't considered a direct contributor to outages. That framing doesn't capture how these systems fail, and we now have data to show why. More importantly, it's now clear alert fatigue is a symptom of a deeper issue: production systems have outgrown the current operational approaches ...

I was on a customer call last fall when an enterprise architect said something I haven't been able to shake. Her team had just spent four months trying to swap one AI vendor for another. The original plan said three weeks. "We didn't switch vendors," she told me. "We rebuilt half our integrations and discovered what we'd actually been depending on." Most enterprise leaders don't expect that to be the experience ...

Ask any senior SRE or platform engineer what keeps them up at night, and the answer probably isn't the monitoring tool — it's the data feeding it. The proliferation of APM, observability, and AIOps platforms has created a telemetry sprawl problem that most teams manage reactively rather than architect proactively. Metrics are going to one platform. Traces routed somewhere else. Logs duplicated across multiple backends because nobody wants to be caught without them when something breaks. Every redundant stream costs money ...

80% of respondents agree that the IT role is shifting from operators to orchestrators, according to the 2026 IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous IT from SolarWinds ...

40% of organizations deploying AI will implement dedicated AI observability tools by 2028 to monitor model performance, bias and outputs, according to Gartner ...

Until AI-powered engineering tools have live visibility of how code behaves at runtime, they cannot be trusted to autonomously ensure reliable systems, according to the State of AI-Powered Engineering Report 2026 report from Lightrun. The report reveals that a major volume of manual work is required when AI-generated code is deployed: 43% of AI-generated code requires manual debugging in production, even after passing QA or staging tests. Furthermore, an average of three manual redeploy cycles are required to verify a single AI-suggested code fix in production ...

Many organizations describe AI as strategic, but they do not manage it strategically. When AI plans are disconnected from strategy, detached from organizational learning, and protected from serious assumptions testing, the problem is no longer technical immaturity; it is a failure of management discipline ... Executives too often tell organizations to "use AI" before they define what AI is supposed to change. The problem deepens in organizations where strategy isn't well articulated in the first place ...

Across the enterprise technology landscape, a quiet crisis is playing out. Organizations have run hundreds, sometimes thousands, of generative AI pilots. Leadership has celebrated the proof of concept (POCs) ... Industry experience points to a sobering reality: only 5-10% of AI POCs that progress to the pilot stage successfully reach scaled production. The remaining 90% fail because the enterprise environment around them was never ready to absorb them, not the AI models ...

Today's modern systems are not what they once were. Organizations now rely on distributed systems, event-driven workflows, hybrid and multi-cloud environments and continuous delivery pipelines. While each adds flexibility, it also introduces new, often invisible failures. Development speed is no longer the primary bottleneck of innovation. Reliability is ...

Seeing is believing, or in this case, seeing is understanding, according to New Relic's 2025 Observability Forecast for Retail and eCommerce report. Retailers who want to provide exceptional customer experiences while improving IT operations efficiency are leaning on observability ... Here are five key takeaways from the report ...