← All posts

AI Security Solutions

97 posts on ai security solutions.

AI Inline Enforcement: The Architectural Pattern Compliance Frameworks Assume

AI inline enforcement is the architectural pattern where policy decisions on AI traffic happen at the moment of the request, in the request path, before the prompt reaches the model. The pattern contrasts with post-hoc detection that observes traffic after the fact and out-of-band approval flows that gate AI usage at provisioning time. The 2026 compliance frameworks, the 22-second median attacker handoff time, and the per-decision audit obligation all assume inline enforcement is the operating layer. The piece walks through what inline means, what it produces, and why the alternatives fall short.

ai-enforcementai-securityarchitectureai-gatewaycomplianceenforcement
Read post →

Per-Role AI Policies: How to Operationalize Identity-Bound AI Authorization

Per-role AI policies authorize what a user can do with AI based on the role the user holds inside the deployer organization. The policy expresses which models a role can call, which data classifications the role can include in prompts, which destinations and actions the role can target, and what oversight applies. The pattern is the AI extension of the role-based access control model the rest of the enterprise security stack already operates. The piece walks through what a per-role AI policy actually contains, how it propagates through the request path, and where it satisfies the regulatory authorization requirements.

ai-policyrbacauthorizationai-securityenforcementidentity
Read post →

AI Response Redaction: The Return-Path Inspection Step Most LLM Deployments Skip

AI response redaction inspects the model output before it reaches the caller and rewrites or blocks any segment that fails policy. The return path matters because LLMs reconstruct sensitive content from training data, retrieve PHI or PII from connected stores, and generate prohibited disclosures even when the prompt was clean. I walk through where response redaction sits in the AI gateway pattern, what the policy decision actually evaluates, and how it satisfies EU AI Act Article 12 and the NIST AI RMF Measure function.

ai-dlpai-securityenforcementredactionauditcompliance
Read post →

LLM DLP vs Traditional DLP: Why the Two Controls Operate on Different Data Channels

Traditional DLP inspects file movements, email egress, and known data shapes on the network. LLM DLP inspects prompt content and model responses at the AI request boundary. The two controls operate on different data channels and produce different evidence. I walk through what each control sees, where each one is blind, and why the EU AI Act Article 12 obligations require a control at the LLM request layer that traditional DLP architectures cannot satisfy.

llm-dlpai-dlpdata-protectionai-securitycomplianceeu-ai-act
Read post →

AI Traffic Inspection: The Layer Where Prompt Content Becomes Visible to the Enterprise Stack

AI traffic inspection is the layer where prompt content becomes visible to the enterprise control stack. Network telemetry sees AI endpoint reachability. CASB sees AI SaaS access. Endpoint DLP sees clipboard events. None of those layers reads the prompt body itself. AI traffic inspection sits at the AI request boundary and reads the structured JSON request and response, which is where the data actually moves. I walk through what the inspection point reads, where the existing telemetry is blind, and how the inspection point produces evidence for the 2026 compliance set.

ai-trafficai-securityinspectionenforcementauditai-dlp
Read post →

Sensitive Data AI Detection: Classifying Prompt Content at the AI Request Boundary

Sensitive data AI detection classifies prompt content at the AI request boundary, where the prompt is reconstructed into a structured payload and a classifier surfaces the categories the policy reads. The category set includes PII (email, phone, SSN, NPI), PHI, PCI, secrets (API keys, tokens, certificates), source code, and customer identifiers. Document-level classifiers do not run cleanly against prompt context windows. The inspection-point classifier runs at request time, surfaces labels the policy uses, and stamps the labels on the per-decision audit record.

data-loss-preventionai-securitydlppolicy-enforcementinline-enforcement
Read post →

AI Security Incident Response: The Playbook Shape That Holds Up Under a Live AI Breach

An AI security incident response playbook covers the five phases of a live response (detection, containment, eradication, recovery, postmortem) adapted to the failure modes specific to AI: prompt-injected agents, model-leaked PII, tool misuse via the LLM, and shadow AI exfiltration. The playbook depends on a per-decision audit record stream the SOC can pull from in real time. This article walks through each phase, what the SOC needs from the runtime architecture, and the postmortem template that ties evidence back to the risk register.

ai-securitycybersecurityinline-enforcementauditai-governance
Read post →

AI Policy Versioning: Why the Audit Record Has to Carry a Policy Version, Not Just a Decision

A per-decision audit record without a policy version is a decision without a rule. When the regulator asks why the model was allowed to produce the response, the answer requires the exact rule set in force at the moment of the decision. AI policy versioning treats the policy plane as code, attaches a version identifier to every decision, and stores the policy text the version refers to in a registry the audit pipeline can reach. This walkthrough covers the versioning scheme, the rollout patterns that survive contention, and the audit-record fields the regulator expects.

policy-versioningai-gatewayauditgovernance-as-codecompliance
Read post →

MCP Policy Enforcement: Treating Model Context Protocol Calls Like AI Traffic, Not Plugin Traffic

Model Context Protocol turned a model conversation into a fan-out of tool calls and resource reads against external systems. Each fan-out arm now carries its own identity, its own scope, and its own data classification, and the policy plane has to evaluate every arm before the model receives the result. MCP policy enforcement sits at the boundary where the agent reaches the MCP server, inspects the call as AI traffic rather than plugin traffic, and produces an audit record per tool invocation. This walkthrough covers the boundary, the policy fields a Principal Engineer expects to see, and the audit fields the regulator expects.

mcpai-gatewaytool-callspolicy-enforcementagentic-ai
Read post →

AI Tool Call Policy Enforcement: Why the Tool Surface Is the Real Attack Surface

A chatbot that only generates text has a small attack surface. The same chatbot wired to ten tool functions that read files, query databases, and call external APIs has the attack surface of those ten functions plus the model that decides when to call them. AI tool call policy enforcement evaluates each function invocation against the identity that triggered it, the data classification of its arguments, and the policy version in force. This walkthrough covers the boundary where the gateway sees tool calls, the rules that scale across hundreds of functions, and the audit record per invocation.

tool-callsai-gatewayfunction-callingpolicy-enforcementagentic-ai
Read post →

LLM Egress Monitoring: Inspecting the Prompt at the Boundary Before It Reaches the Model Provider

Traditional egress monitoring inspects outbound network traffic against a network-DLP catalog. The catalog was designed for file transfers, email attachments, and web form submissions. LLM prompts leave the enterprise as HTTPS request bodies to api.openai.com, api.anthropic.com, and the Bedrock and Vertex endpoints. The network DLP inspects the header but cannot inspect the body when the body is TLS-encrypted. Even where a proxy terminates TLS, the DLP pattern set does not recognize prompt content the way it recognizes credit card numbers or file signatures. This piece walks through the failure modes, the inspection-layer architecture, and the enforcement decisions the layer supports.

ai-dlpllm-dlpegress-monitoringnetwork-securityshadow-ai
Read post →

LLM Response Redaction Patterns: How to Filter Model Output Without Breaking the Response

The prompt is the input the gateway inspects before the model sees it. The response is the output the gateway inspects before the caller sees it. Response redaction runs against free-form generated text, which is a harder inspection problem than prompt classification. This piece walks through the redaction patterns that hold up on the response side: token-boundary preservation, semantic-preserving substitution, structured-response filtering, and the audit records that prove the filter ran. The patterns apply to the LLM DLP layer of any inline gateway.

llm-dlpresponse-redactionai-securityai-dlpai-gatewaydata-leak-prevention
Read post →