A CISO-ready audit in 22 seconds.
Here's a real audit SanctumShield produced for a realistic healthcare scenario — the inputs we gave it, the output Claude returned, and what each finding means.
Every word below was generated by Claude Sonnet 4.5 from the exact inputs shown, in a single 22.5-second streaming response through the /api/audit/generate endpoint. Nothing was edited, rewritten, or embellished. This is what subscribers see in their dashboard on day one of the trial.
Meet Acme Health.
A fictional but realistic 150-person healthcare SaaS company operating in the US under HIPAA and SOC 2. Their CISO suspects employees are using consumer AI tools with patient data but has no visibility into which tools or how much. Their firewall logs hold the answer — they just need someone to read them against an AI endpoint registry and pair the result with a real risk model. They run the SanctumShield audit.
- NameAcme Health
- IndustryHealthcare
- Size51–200 employees
- JurisdictionsUnited States
- FrameworksHIPAA · SOC 2
- ChatGPTHIGHConsumer tier trains on inputs unless opt-out is enabled. No BAA available on consumer plans.
- CursorHIGHSends source code to configured LLM backend. Privacy mode not on by default.
- 89×chat.openai.comConsumer ChatGPT
- 12×character.aiRoleplay chatbot · no healthcare compliance
22 seconds later, a board-ready report.
The Sanctum passed the three inputs above into our policy-anchored prompt. The Shield streamed the response from Claude Sonnet 4.5 as it generated. The full JSON output is roughly 5,000 words across eight findings, a regulatory exposure matrix, a 90-day action plan, and a departmental breakdown. Here are the first pieces:
“Unauthorized AI tools with 101 confirmed network connections are processing PHI without HIPAA-compliant safeguards or Business Associate Agreements.”
Network traffic analysis reveals unauthorized use of AI tools processing protected health information (PHI) without Business Associate Agreements, creating immediate HIPAA violation risk. Of 142 outbound connections analyzed, 89 connected to OpenAI's consumer ChatGPT service and 12 to Character.AI — a roleplay chatbot platform with no healthcare compliance certifications. Both services train models on user inputs by default, meaning PHI entered by employees may now reside in third-party training datasets permanently.
The company confirmed only 2 AI tools in use but acknowledged the total is unknown, indicating zero visibility into shadow AI adoption across the 51–200 person workforce. Additionally, Cursor IDE is sending source code — potentially containing hardcoded credentials, patient identifiers, or proprietary algorithms — to external LLM backends without code sanitization controls. This represents a critical gap in both technical safeguards (HIPAA Security Rule §164.312) and vendor management (HIPAA Privacy Rule §164.502).
PHI Exposure via Consumer-Grade AI Services Without BAAs
Network logs show 89 connections to chat.openai.com (consumer ChatGPT) and 12 to character.ai, neither of which have Business Associate Agreements with Acme Health. Consumer-tier ChatGPT explicitly trains on user inputs unless enterprise agreements prohibit it. Character.AI is a roleplay chatbot platform with no healthcare compliance framework and unknown data retention policies. Any PHI entered into these services constitutes an unauthorized disclosure under HIPAA.
These are real HIPAA clauses. §164.502(e) governs permitted disclosures to business associates — and specifically requires a BAA before PHI is shared. §164.312 governs technical safeguards for protecting electronic PHI. Claude cited them because the prompt explicitly asked it to map findings to the frameworks Acme Health declared in scope (HIPAA + SOC 2), and because the model has enough context about healthcare regulation to do so accurately.
Carry it to your renewal.
One page your broker can place in the underwriting file: a one-page renewal summary of your four artifacts, dated, with what changed since the last one. See a sample.
Your four AI governance documents, ready to share with your board, your staff and your insurer.
Every level covers all twelve areas of AI governance and produces the same four documents. Choose how much time you want to spend. You can go deeper at any time and every answer comes with you.
One sitting, plain questions. Anyone can do it. Done in one sitting, in plain words, by anyone.
All four governance documents.
A longer session. Helpful to have your IT person or provider nearby.
All four governance documents.
A full working session for IT and security teams, with every detail.
All four governance documents.
The Executive Risk Report, the AI Acceptable Use Policy with a sign-and-date line for each person, the Board Memo and the AI Posture Summary, each with a Verification URL. Every open item gets an owner and a ninety-day next step, and next time your review starts with what you finished.
Specific, cited and dated,
from your own answers.
The audit you just read is written for one organization (Acme Health, 150 people), anchored to the regulations that apply (HIPAA clauses cited by number), and checked against observed traffic (89 and 12 are real hit counts, not estimates).
- Level: Light, Standard or Complete, as much time as you choose, with the same four documents at every level.
- Evidence: a catalog of 130 AI tools and built-in AI features, and a registry of 118 known AI endpoints matched against your network logs.
- Documents: the Executive Risk Report, AI Acceptable Use Policy, Board Memo, AI Posture Summary, each with a Verification URL.
- Cadence: re-run whenever your AI changes, and each run produces a new dated set.
SanctumShield delivers AI governance you can prove, with privacy by design. Your answers and documents stay with you. All we keep is a small verification record, so anyone you share a document with can confirm when it was made and that it matches.
The test harness.
The audit above is not a marketing mockup. It's the live output of three endpoints we run as an end-to-end test against every deploy. If any of them regresses, the deploy is blocked. Here's what the test harness actually does:
Free Shadow AI Check
FREE · INSTANTA ten-question self-assessment that scores any organization's exposure to unmanaged AI tool usage in under sixty seconds. Results are deterministic, immediate, and free — no account required, no charge, no waiting. The output names the three most pressing gaps in your current AI governance posture and quantifies your risk on a 0–100 scale across four tiers.
→ Three high-severity findings tailored to your answers
→ Zero cost · no account required
Network Log Analysis & AI Endpoint Detection
EVIDENCE-BASEDPaste a list of outbound hostnames from any firewall, proxy, or DNS log. SanctumShield works from a catalog of 130 AI tools and built-in AI features, and a registry of 118 known AI endpoints matched against your network logs, with suffix-aware matching (so eu.api.openai.com still hits api.openai.com). The registry covers consumer LLMs, enterprise APIs, multi-model gateways, code AI, image / video / voice generation, and high-risk jurisdictions.
→ Per-endpoint hit counts with vendor and category
→ Pre-rated risk tier for every match
Executive Risk Report & AI Acceptable Use Policy
CISO-READYA full audit pipeline that combines your company profile, your tools inventory, your network log analysis, and your declared compliance frameworks into two board-ready deliverables: an Executive Risk Report and a customized AI Acceptable Use Policy. Outputs cite specific regulatory clauses (HIPAA §164.502(e), SOC 2 CC6.1, EU AI Act Article 5, NIST AI RMF, GDPR Article 22) and include a prioritized 90-day action plan with named owners and effort levels.
→ 14-section AI Acceptable Use Policy customized to industry and frameworks
→ Downloadable as Word (.docx), Markdown, plain text, and HTML
Every SanctumShield deployment runs this end-to-end test harness before going live. If any of the three regresses, the deploy is blocked and the team is alerted before a customer ever sees it.
Three reasons a CISO
writes the check today.
The board is already asking.
AI governance moved from an IT question to a board question in 2026. Every director has read about an AI data breach. They're asking the CISO for a posture update. SanctumShield gives the CISO an answer the same week, with specific numbers — 89 connections, 12 connections, $1.5M annual OCR max — that read as credible rather than hand-wavy.
Generic templates fail audits.
SOC 2 and HIPAA auditors no longer accept a generic AI policy copied from a template. They want a policy that names the tools actually in use, maps them to specific regulatory clauses, and shows evidence of enforcement. SanctumShield produces all three — the policy, the mapping, and the evidence trail — from the audit-generation pipeline itself.
The landscape changes monthly.
Every month a new AI tool shows up in your employees' browsers. Every quarter a regulation updates. Every year your SOC 2 comes around again. A one-time audit is stale in 30 days. SanctumShield re-scans on a monthly cadence and flags drift automatically — which is why the subscription is defensible, not arbitrary.
What SanctumShield covers
The walkthrough above follows one run; this is the full scope of every run.
130 AI tools and built-in AI features (82 tools, 48 built-in features) and 118 known AI endpoints matched against your network logs.
The assessment covers your company profile, the AI tools in use, AI built into the business software you already pay for, personal and unmanaged devices (BYOD), MCP gateways, the assurance record, document-grounded AI answers, the agent inventory and agentic posture, agent permissions and your network logs.
You receive the Executive Risk Report, AI Acceptable Use Policy, Board Memo and AI Posture Summary, each dated and downloadable as PDF, Word, HTML, Markdown and plain text, with a Verification URL for each.
Catalog and registry refreshed monthly. Latest update: October 27, 2026
SanctumShield does not watch your agents run. No product in this category observes an agent’s intent as it crosses your business systems, and SanctumShield does not claim to. What it records is the layer above that: who authorized the agent, what it was permitted to do, who signs when it causes harm, and the dated proof that those decisions were made. Forrester’s The AI CISO puts the burden the same way: an organization must be able to prove documented guardrails, continuous assurance and auditable behavior, including across its third-party AI supply chain. (Forrester, April 2026)