99% of Companies Expose Sensitive Data to AI Without Knowing It

A comprehensive Varonis analysis of 1,000 organizations has uncovered a disturbing reality: 99% of companies have sensitive data that can easily be accessed by AI systems, while 89% of AI usage remains completely invisible to security teams. This perfect storm of exposure and invisibility is creating unprecedented security risks.

The Staggering Scale of Hidden AI Usage

The data reveals a massive blind spot in corporate security. Organizations have zero visibility into 89% of AI usage happening within their networks, despite having security policies in place. This shadow AI phenomenon has exploded across industries, with some sectors seeing 250% year-over-year increases in unauthorized AI tool usage.

Employees are leading this charge independently, with Software AG's survey of 6,000 knowledge workers revealing that 75% regularly use AI for work, and approximately 50% access AI tools not provided or approved by their employer. The problem is accelerating rapidly: between March 2023 and March 2024, the amount of corporate data workers put into AI tools increased by 485%. More alarmingly, 27.4% of this data was classified as sensitive, up from just 10.7% a year earlier.

The Human Factor: Why Employees Risk Everything for AI

The research reveals troubling patterns in employee behavior around AI usage. Nearly half (48%) of employees have uploaded sensitive company or customer information into public generative AI tools, while 44% admit to using AI at work in ways that violate organizational policies. The Anagram security survey found that 58% of employees admitted to pasting sensitive data into large language models, including client records and internal documents.

Even more concerning is the lack of transparency: 61% of employees avoid revealing when they use AI, 55% present AI-generated content as their own, and 66% use AI tools without knowing if it's allowed. This behavior creates a cascade of risks, with 66% of respondents admitting they rely on AI output without evaluation, and 56% having made work mistakes due to AI reliance.

Corporate Oversight Gap: Policies Without Enforcement

The corporate response to shadow AI usage has been inadequate at best. Only 34% of employees say their organization has a policy guiding generative AI tool use, with just 6% reporting their organization bans it outright. More critically, 52% of employed participants in the CybSafe and NCA survey said they have never received training on safe AI use.

The infrastructure tells the same story of inadequate control. In the workplace, 73.8% of ChatGPT accounts are non-corporate accounts that lack enterprise security and privacy controls. The percentage is even higher for other platforms: 94.4% for Gemini and 95.9% for Bard. This means the vast majority of AI interactions in corporate environments are happening outside any security framework.

Customer Service: The Front Line of Risk

Customer service departments represent a particular vulnerability, with nearly 50% of customer service agents using shadow AI according to Zendesk's 2025 CX Trends Report. These employees routinely handle the most sensitive customer data-personal information, account details, transaction histories, and support tickets containing detailed problem descriptions.

When customer service agents paste this information into unauthorized AI tools for help with responses or problem-solving, they're potentially exposing entire customer databases to systems without proper data protection. The real-time, high-volume nature of customer service work makes this sector particularly susceptible to data leakage through AI interactions.

How PromptGuard Brings Shadow AI Into the Light

PromptGuard directly addresses the twin problems of data exposure and usage invisibility that plague 99% of organizations. Our browser-based detection provides complete visibility into AI usage across your organization, regardless of which tools employees choose to use. Instead of trying to block every possible AI platform, we focus on protecting the data itself.

Our real-time monitoring creates detailed audit logs of all AI interactions, finally giving security teams the visibility they desperately need. When employees attempt to share sensitive data with any AI platform-approved or unauthorized-PromptGuard flags the attempt, explains the risk, and provides safe alternatives. This approach transforms shadow AI from an invisible threat into a managed, visible process.

For the 89% of AI usage currently flying under the radar, PromptGuard provides immediate detection and classification. Organizations can finally see which employees are using which AI tools, what type of data they're sharing, and where the highest risks lie. This visibility enables informed policy decisions based on actual usage patterns rather than guesswork.

Conclusion

The Varonis findings confirm what security professionals have long suspected: AI adoption is outpacing security controls at a dangerous rate. With 99% of organizations exposing sensitive data and 89% of AI usage remaining invisible, traditional security approaches are failing. Organizations need proactive data protection that works regardless of which AI tools employees discover and adopt next.