AI Governance for
Regulated Industries

HIPAA · HITECH

Healthcare

Clinical AI Without PHI Exposure

Healthcare systems deploying Copilot or custom clinical AI face an immediate compliance risk: SharePoint environments containing PHI are often over-permissioned, and Copilot service accounts inherit access to patient records, clinical notes, and billing data that agents should never be able to retrieve.

Risks Without Gatepost

• Copilot retrieving PHI-tagged documents outside the treating care team
• No chunk-level audit trail for HIPAA breach investigation
• AI agent access to billing records triggers payer audit exposure
• Multiple EHR integrations create compound permission inheritance risk

Outcomes With Gatepost

• PHI-tagged content blocked from all non-clinical agents
• Per-encounter retrieval log available for HIPAA breach investigation within minutes
• Agent suspension capability isolates compromised agents without disrupting clinical staff
• Automated HIPAA compliance posture report for Privacy Officer quarterly review

FCA · MiFID II · SOX

Financial Services

Governed AI for Regulated Trading Floors

Investment banks and asset managers rolling out AI assistants face model risk management requirements that extend to AI data retrieval. FCA expects firms to demonstrate that AI tools cannot access material non-public information or client data beyond the scope of regulated activity.

Risks Without Gatepost

• AI agents accessing MNPI-tagged deal documents during live transactions
• Cross-desk retrieval: research AI reaching trading desk data
• No policy-version evidence for FCA supervisory review
• MiFID II suitability process contaminated by AI retrieving wrong client data

Outcomes With Gatepost

• Information barrier enforcement extended to AI agents — not just human users
• Deal document classification ceilings prevent MNPI retrieval by non-deal agents
• Policy version audit chain satisfies FCA Model Risk Management guidance
• SOX-compliant audit trail for AI-assisted financial reporting workflows

NIST 800-171 · CMMC · FedRAMP

Defense & Government

CUI Protection in AI-Enabled Workflows

Defense contractors and government agencies deploying Microsoft 365 AI must demonstrate CUI handling compliance. CMMC Level 2+ requires access control enforcement for any system — including AI tools — that touches Controlled Unclassified Information.

Risks Without Gatepost

• AI agents retrieving CUI-tagged documents without access control enforcement
• Copilot used in cleared-adjacent workflows with no audit evidence for DCSA
• No mechanism to register and policy-bind custom DoD-specific AI agents
• CMMC assessment gap: AI data access not covered in current access control practice families

Outcomes With Gatepost

• CUI classification ceilings enforced per agent per contract vehicle
• CMMC AC.L2-3.1.3 access control evidence generated automatically
• Agent registry enables DCSA audit of all AI systems touching CUI
• In-tenant deployment satisfies FedRAMP data residency requirements

SRA · ABA · Client Confidentiality

Legal & Professional Services

Privilege Protection in AI-Assisted Legal Work

Law firms and professional services firms face an existential risk with AI assistants: inadvertent access to privileged client communications, matter-specific documents, or conflict-sensitive data by AI tools operating across matter boundaries.

Risks Without Gatepost

• AI assistant crossing matter walls — retrieving documents from opposing client matters
• Privilege waiver risk if AI retrieval of attorney-client communications is not logged
• No mechanism to isolate AI access by client engagement or matter number
• Partner departure: former partner's AI access to matters must be immediately revocable

Outcomes With Gatepost

• Matter-level sensitivity labeling enforced as agent retrieval ceiling
• Privilege-tagged documents blocked from general-purpose AI assistants
• Instant agent suspension when conflict check fails — before any retrieval occurs
• Full retrieval audit log for professional responsibility board defense