Control over AI
Blog
Compliance and AI 9 min read

AI in financial services: protecting client data under supervision

Meeting notes full of account numbers end up in ChatGPT in seconds. What that means for a regulated firm, and how to stay on top of it without banning AI.

ChatGPT5
Can you summarise this client meeting note for the file?
Of course. Paste the note below and I'll turn it into a short summary.
ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

The example above is interactive. Click a highlighted value to see what you can do with it.

Quick answer

Financial services firms handle passport numbers, account numbers, income, policy and pension data every day. If that data ends up in a free AI tool without a data processing agreement, it is a data breach, even when it was an accident. Financial regulators look at sound and controlled business operations and the duty of care towards clients; careful handling of client data is part of both. Banning AI pushes use onto personal devices. What works: knowing which AI tools are in use, a highlight while you type, documents anonymised before sharing and aggregated counts as evidence for audits, DPIAs and questions from regulators.

01

Meeting notes with a passport number and IBAN end up in a prompt in the rush of a normal day, not out of malice

02

In a free AI tool without a data processing agreement, that is a data breach

03

Regulators look at sound business operations and the duty of care; careful handling of client data is a demonstrable part of both

04

A ban pushes AI use onto personal devices; visibility of the tools and help while typing work better

05

Counts of detections and how they were handled are your evidence for audits, DPIAs and questions from regulators

An adviser pastes meeting notes into ChatGPT and asks for a summary for the client file. The notes contain the client's name, her passport number, the household income and two account numbers. That same afternoon, a claims handler three desks away asks a chatbot for a tactful rejection letter, with the medical details from the claim still in it. Both answers arrive in seconds. By then the data has already left the firm.

Clients share their financial situation because they expect it to stay within the firm. That trust is at the heart of the profession, and it is exactly what is at stake in a prompt like that. It also raises the question every regulated firm faces sooner or later: can you show you have this under control?

Few sectors hold this much sensitive data

An average advice file holds more sensitive data than all the records of many other businesses. Passport numbers and ID documents. Account numbers and transaction overviews. Income and tax data, mortgage and valuation files, policy and pension data. Claims add medical details, KYC files add the UBOs of corporate clients, accounting adds payslips and annual accounts.

AI speeds up work on those files. A summary of a client meeting, a first draft of an advice report, a carefully worded reply to a complaint: it is there in seconds. The same speed makes the work more vulnerable, because whatever is in a prompt has left the firm before anyone has given it a thought.

How often that happens has now been measured. In a global study by KPMG and the University of Melbourne covering 48,000 workers in 47 countries (Trust, Attitudes and Use of AI, 2025), 58 per cent said they knowingly use AI for work, almost half said they sometimes put sensitive company data into public AI tools and 57 per cent said they keep their AI use hidden from their employer. Apply that to a firm of ten: almost half have put sensitive data into a public tool at some point, and more than half will not tell you about it.

Nobody means to; it happens in the rush

The problem is rarely bad intent. It is an adviser who wants to write up a meeting between two appointments and does not strip out the identifying details first. If that happens in a free AI tool without a data processing agreement, it is a data breach, even when it was an accident. What such an agreement covers, and why the free tiers rarely come with one, is explained in our article on data processing agreements and AI tools.

The reflex is to ban it. That feels safe, but it pushes use onto personal laptops and phones, where nobody can see it at all. That is how shadow AI takes hold, precisely where the data is most sensitive. Training helps, but people know the rules and forget them on busy days. What remains is a policy on paper, with no visibility of the tools in use and no evidence for an audit.

People need help while they work: in the text field, as they type. And the firm needs to see what is actually running. You need both.

First, see which AI is running

Before you can do anything about behaviour, you need to know what is being used. Alongside ChatGPT, a firm soon accumulates AI meeting recorders, transcription tools and clever plug-ins nobody ever approved.

The BeeSensible dashboard shows which AI tools are in use across the firm and how often, matched against a catalogue of over 1,000 tools, each with a risk score. You decide for each tool what is allowed. BeeSensible never decides for you, and never shows who uses a tool. When someone opens a tool that has not been approved, a gentle notice appears, pointing to the approved alternative. BeeSensible does not block anything of its own accord: whether someone can carry on after the notice is the firm's choice.

AI register
AllowedUnder reviewNot allowedAll tools
Search by tool, vendor, domain or former name…
1,012 tools
DeepSeek
Critical · 90/100
Not allowed
Otter.aiNew
High · 68/100
No decision yet
Grok
High · 67/100
Not allowed
ChatGPT
High · 62/100
Allowed
Perplexity
Medium · 55/100
No decision yet
HeyGen
Medium · 53/100
No decision yet

Every tool, scored for risk

Over 1,000 AI tools, each scored from Low to Critical. Nothing is approved or blocked until someone decides.

More about AI Governance

For a regulated firm this is also the start of a register: for each tool the vendor, the hosting, the use cases, an owner and a recorded decision. The AI register keeps that up to date, with a review date for each tool.

A highlight at the moment it matters

The other half happens in the text field itself. An adviser summarises a client meeting. The passport number and IBAN get a red highlight, the name and phone number a yellow one. The highlights appear as you type, like a spellchecker. The adviser chooses: mask the value with a placeholder such as [NAME1], or remove it. BeeSensible does not block anything of its own accord. If the firm wants more certainty, it can set masking on paste or on send to On by default or Always on. The example at the top of this page shows exactly that moment, and it works: click a highlighted value to see the actions.

The same happens in email and chat. The extension runs in Chrome and Edge, in the apps you already work in: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, Gmail, Outlook, Slack, WhatsApp Web, LinkedIn and more. The desktop app also covers Outlook, ChatGPT, Claude and Copilot as native apps. How the highlight works and what happens to the text is explained on the Realtime Privacy page.

The setting varies across financial services, but the moment is always the same:

  • Mortgage and financial advice. Summarise an application or meeting notes without passport numbers and IBANs. Valuation reports and pension statements anonymised first, then shared.
  • Insurance and claims. Summarise a claim while the medical details are highlighted. Policy and account details visible before sending.
  • Accounting and payroll. IDs and salaries in payslips and annual accounts are highlighted. KYC and UBO files anonymised before they go into an AI tool.
  • Banking and wealth management. Transaction overviews highlighted in reporting prompts, client reports anonymised for analysis.

A claims handler summarising the claim of Aoife Walsh does not need to include her diagnosis and policy number. The summary is no worse for it, and far less data is processed.

Files anonymised before they leave the firm

Not everything sensitive travels as typed text. An application file, valuation report or set of annual accounts moves as a file: forwarded to a colleague, shared with a lender or added to an AI conversation for a first pass. For those files, the dashboard or the extension opens the document itself, whether it is a PDF, a scan, a Word or an Excel file; the desktop app does this for PDF. The sensitive fields are already ticked; you decide what goes and export an anonymised copy in the same format. If the firm has switched on masking on attach, BeeSensible first holds back a file you add in ChatGPT or Claude: you choose check and mask, add the original or cancel. Hidden document properties are stripped too, so nothing travels along in the file's metadata.

PreviewAnonymise (4)
The desktop app highlights sensitive fields in a document so you can redact them before you share it or paste it into an AI tool.

That check runs on our servers in the EU, and the document is not stored.

The evidence regulators, the GDPR and the AI Act ask for

Back to the question this article started with: can you show you have this under control? For a financial services firm, that question comes from three directions at once.

Financial supervision. Regulators look at sound and controlled business operations and the duty of care towards clients, whether that is the FCA in the UK, the AFM in the Netherlands or another national authority. There is no separate regulatory seal of approval for AI. But careful handling of client data is clearly part of sound operations, and that is what BeeSensible helps you demonstrate: there is a policy for each tool, there is help while people type and there are counts of what happens. BeeSensible does not discharge your regulatory obligations. It makes one part of them tangible and demonstrable.

GDPR. The accountability principle requires you to demonstrate appropriate measures. Highlighting at the point of input supports data minimisation exactly where personal data is about to leave the firm. The aggregated counts of detections and how they were handled serve as evidence in an audit and a DPIA.

EU AI Act. AI literacy has been mandatory since February 2025 for everyone who works with AI, and since the Digital Omnibus it has been a best-efforts obligation. You need to be able to show what you are doing. Highlights while people type are a practical way to do that: the employee sees what is sensitive in every prompt and stays in charge. What the deadlines look like after the omnibus is covered in our AI Act timeline.

The dashboard brings those three together on the Accountability screen. For a month or a quarter it shows the AI tools observed and the tools with a decision, the critical detections and the share adjusted, and the AI notices shown and how often the alternative was opened. For each provision of the GDPR, NIS2 and the AI Act, it sets out what the law says, what BeeSensible contributes and what falls outside its scope. A report for each period is frozen with a checksum.

See

Which AI tools are actually in use, how often and at what risk. Every tool is scored against a catalogue of over 1,000 tools.

See the AI Governance module
Decide

Every tool's status is the organisation's own call: allowed, limited use, not allowed. The risk score is advice, never a verdict.

See the AI register
Help

That decision shows up while someone works: a notice on the tool, a highlight while they type. Blocking is not something BeeSensible does by itself.

See Realtime Privacy
Substantiate

The same observations become your evidence: six figures per period, next to the provisions of the GDPR, NIS2 and the AI Act. Never what was typed, never an individual.

See Substantiate
Dashboard · Accountability GDPRNIS2AI Act
  • Visibility of AI use

    Which AI tools were visited, and how many of them have a decision

    AI tools seen · Tools with a decision
  • Protection of sensitive data

    Critical detections, and how many were masked or removed before sending

    Critical detections · Adjusted
  • Supporting staff

    AI notices shown, and how often the alternative was opened afterwards

    AI notices shown · Alternative opened
The same observations, as six figures next to the provisions of the GDPR, NIS2 and the AI Act, showing for each provision what falls outside BeeSensible's scope. BeeSensible supports compliance; it does not make you compliant by itself.

The foundations fit the sector. A data processing agreement is signed with every customer and a product DPIA is available on request. Detection runs on our own servers at two European providers, both ISO 27001 certified. Typed text is never stored, and the dashboard never shows content and never an individual.

Policy and training alone, or with help in the text field

What the trade-off looks like at most firms:

Policy and training aloneWith BeeSensible
The rules live in a documentThe highlight appears in the text field, as people type
No view of which AI tools are in useThe dashboard shows AI use per tool
A data breach comes to light after the factSensitive data is visible before sending
No evidence for the auditCounts of detections and what happened to them
A ban pushes AI onto personal devicesBeeSensible does not block anything of its own accord; what happens at a tool you do not allow is the firm's choice

Policy and training are still needed. What BeeSensible adds is help at the moment where both most often fall short: the rush, just before sending. That is where the highlight appears, and where the adviser can still get it right. What employees should keep out of prompts altogether is covered in our article on what not to share with AI.

For internal discussion, the financial services leaflet sums this story up on two pages. More sector context is on the finance teams page. And to see it on your own texts first: in a 20-minute demo we show the highlights on texts like the ones your firm writes.

FAQ

Common questions

Can a financial adviser paste client details into ChatGPT?

Not into a free or personal version. Client details are personal data, and often sensitive personal data, such as passport numbers, income figures or medical details in a claim. Processing them in an AI tool requires a legal basis, data minimisation and a data processing agreement with the provider. In practice the task usually works without the identifying details, by masking or removing them before the prompt is sent.

Is it a data breach when client data ends up in a free AI tool?

Yes. Without a data processing agreement, personal data leaves the organisation with nothing agreed about what happens to it. That is a data breach, even when it was an accident. Depending on the risk to the people involved, it must be reported to your data protection authority, such as the ICO in the UK, and sometimes to the client.

What do financial regulators expect from AI use?

Regulators look at sound and controlled business operations and the duty of care towards clients, whether that is the FCA in the UK, the AFM in the Netherlands or another national authority. There is no separate regulatory seal of approval for AI. Careful handling of client data is part of sound operations, and when questions come, you want to be able to show which measures are in place and that they work. A policy on paper alone is a thin answer.

Should we ban AI at the firm?

A ban feels safe, but it pushes use onto personal laptops and phones, where nobody can see it. In a 2025 study by KPMG and the University of Melbourne, 57 per cent of workers said they keep their AI use hidden from their employer. The approach that lasts is to make safe use possible and to make the risk visible at the moment it arises.

How do we show an auditor or DPO that the measures work?

With counts instead of intentions. The BeeSensible dashboard shows, in aggregate, which AI tools are in use, how much sensitive data was highlighted and what happened to it. It never shows the text itself, and never an individual. Those counts serve as evidence in an audit, a DPIA and conversations with a regulator.

Does this work for mortgage files and annual accounts?

Yes. You first open an application file, valuation report or set of annual accounts in the dashboard or the extension: PDFs (scans included), Word, Excel, PowerPoint and images, and the file comes back in the same format. The desktop app does this for PDF. The sensitive fields are already ticked; you decide what goes and export an anonymised copy. Hidden document properties are stripped too.

See how BeeSensible works

Sensitive data gets a marking while you type, in the tools your team already works in. You decide what happens before you send.

Portrait of Rens Timmermans from BeeSensible

Prefer someone to walk you through it?

Rens, BeeSensible

I'm happy to give you a twenty-minute tour. Leave your details and I'll find a time that suits you. You're also welcome to call or email.

Prefer to talk to someone first?

Want a live demo, or a quote for 100+ users? Leave your details and we'll be in touch within one working day.