As AI tools like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Microsoft Copilot become increasingly integrated into personal and professional workflows, users may inadvertently expose sensitive information to risk.

According to Fast Company, these generative AI platforms often retain detailed records of every user conversation, raising growing concerns about data privacy and exposure.

Understanding What Happens to Your Chat History

By default, most major AI assistants store user interactions online, typically for an indefinite period.

OpenAI’s ChatGPT warns that training data “may incidentally include personal information.”

Gemini stores chat data unless users manually enable auto-deletion, while Microsoft Copilot retains it for 18 months unless removed.

Even when users delete chats, data may still linger. For example, OpenAI keeps deleted or temporary chats for up to 30 days for “security and legal obligations.”

Meta AI, meanwhile, offers no private chat mode and retains user data indefinitely.

Duck.AI and Proton Lumo stand out by not using user data to train AI. Proton Lumo, notably, does not store chat logs at all.

Can AI Providers View or Share Your Conversations?

Human review of conversations is a standard practice across many AI platforms.

OpenAI states it may “review conversations to improve its systems.”

Google admits that even deleted Gemini chats can be retained for up to three years if reviewed.

Meta and Microsoft also rely on both automated and human methods to process user data.

Some platforms, like Anthropic Claude, promise no human review unless chats violate policies. Duck.AI and Proton Lumo also refrain from manual oversight.

When it comes to targeted ads, several platforms, like Meta and Perplexity, use chat data for ad-related purposes, though OpenAI and Anthropic explicitly avoid such practices.

The Corporate Challenge: Balancing AI Use and Data Protection

Enterprises are increasingly adopting generative AI to drive productivity, but the risk of employees inputting sensitive corporate data into AI tools is significant.

A report from Fortune highlights a study by Varonis, which revealed that nearly every company has employees using unauthorized generative AI applications, almost half of them involving high-risk tools.

James Robinson, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope, emphasized, “What we have is not a technology problem, but a user challenge.”

He argued that security teams must align data policies with how employees use AI tools, without stifling productivity.

Jacob DePriest, CISO at 1Password, explained his company’s approach to AI policy: “It’s this theme of ‘Please use AI responsibly; please focus on approved tools.’”

However, overly cautious policies can deter usage, suggesting the need for a balance between security and functionality.

Security Best Practices for Safe AI Usage

Experts recommend several user-level steps to mitigate risks. In a guide published by Forbes, users should avoid entering sensitive data, like passwords or financial information, into any AI chat.

Public Wi-Fi should be avoided unless a VPN is in use, and multi-factor authentication (MFA) should be enabled.

Disabling AI training, using temporary chat modes, and avoiding link-sharing of sensitive conversations are all advised.

Users should also routinely export and review stored data, log out of unused devices, and monitor updates to AI privacy policies.

For deeper protection, consider browser tools like Privacy Badger and maintain separate accounts for personal and professional interactions.

Why Banning AI Tools at Work Doesn’t Solve the Problem

Despite the risks, banning AI tools may backfire. Brooke Johnson, SVP of HR and Security at Ivanti, noted that nearly one-third of employees keep their AI usage hidden from management.

“They’re sharing company data with systems nobody vetted,” she said.

Johnson cautioned against blanket bans, advocating instead for transparency and structured oversight.

“You don’t want employees to get better at hiding AI use,” she explained.

Educating users about specific risks and guiding them through approved practices is more effective than punitive measures.

With AI agents gaining decision-making capabilities, future risks will only intensify.

DePriest warned that AI agents with access to credentials and tokens “could impact a human” if granted unchecked authority.

For now, the most effective strategy remains a mix of education, transparency, and policy alignment, allowing businesses and users to leverage AI’s power without compromising critical data.

PHOTO: FREEPIK

This article was created with AI assistance.