Category: Journal

Generative AI makes an unusual promise: give the system more context and the answer often improves. That same behaviour creates its most immediate business risk. The easiest way to obtain a tailored summary, email or analysis is to paste in material that may contain personal data, client confidences, commercially sensitive details or intellectual property.

The first control is therefore not a clever prompt. It is deciding what the service should receive at all.

This is general information, not legal or cyber-security advice. The appropriate controls depend on the data, the service, the contract and the purpose.

Treat the prompt as a disclosure

Typing information into an external AI service transfers it to a supplier’s system. The friendly chat interface can disguise that basic fact. Before using real material, identify the data controller and processor roles, where data is processed, how long it is retained, whether it may be used for training and who can access logs.

A free consumer account and a contracted business service may have different terms and controls even when the model name looks identical. Do not infer business confidentiality from familiarity with the brand.

Begin with a defined purpose

State the business problem before selecting the tool. “We want AI” is not a purpose. “We want to produce a first summary of public consultation responses, with a person verifying every theme” is specific enough to assess.

A good governance step is to document the business requirement, the risks and the mitigations before adopting a tool. The NCSC likewise encourages leaders to consider the operational and reputational consequences if an AI system fails or its confidentiality is compromised.

Ask whether the same outcome can be achieved with public, synthetic or properly anonymised material. If the personal data is not necessary, do not provide it.

Personal data still carries obligations

UK data-protection principles continue to apply when AI is involved. A business needs a lawful basis, transparency, purpose limitation, data minimisation, accuracy, security and appropriate retention. Special-category data and criminal-offence data require additional care.

Removing a name may not anonymise a record. A job title, location, unusual event and date can identify somebody when combined. Pseudonymised data remains personal data when the organisation can reconnect the code to a person.

Use the ICO’s AI guidance and risk toolkit where processing may affect individuals. A data-protection impact assessment may be required when processing is likely to result in high risk.

Confidential and regulated information

Create a short classification rule employees can apply. For example:

• Public: already approved for publication; suitable for approved tools.
• Internal: ordinary business information; use only in contracted, approved services with appropriate settings.
• Confidential: client, employee, pricing, legal, security or unpublished strategy information; do not enter without an assessed use case and explicit controls.
• Highly restricted: passwords, authentication secrets, payment data, medical information or similarly sensitive material; prohibit from general-purpose AI prompts.

The exact labels matter less than giving people a usable decision. “Be careful with AI” is not an operational policy.

Check the service, not just the model

Review:

1. contractual confidentiality and data-processing terms;
2. whether prompts or outputs are used to train models;
3. retention periods and deletion controls;
4. processing locations and international transfers;
5. administrator access, audit logs and user management;
6. encryption and account security;
7. subprocessors and connected plugins;
8. export and termination arrangements; and
9. the supplier’s incident process.

Disable unnecessary integrations. Connecting email, storage and customer systems can broaden a limited writing assistant into a route across the organisation’s information.

Minimise before prompting

Use a template, abstract facts or synthetic example where possible. Replace real names and identifiers, remove irrelevant columns and shorten documents to the passages needed for the purpose. Do not upload an entire mailbox to summarise one thread.

Remember that prompts, uploaded files, conversation history and generated output may all be retained differently. A safe prompt can still produce an unsafe output if the system has access to connected data.

Human review is a control, not a slogan

Generative systems can produce plausible errors, invented citations and uneven results. Assign a person with enough subject knowledge and authority to check the output. The reviewer should compare important claims with original sources, not merely read the generated prose for confidence.

For decisions affecting people, clarify what the AI contributes and what the human decides. A person who automatically accepts the recommendation is not meaningful oversight.

Keep proportionate records of the use case, tool version or service, sources, checks and final decision. That gives the business a clearer basis for oversight, repeatability and incident response if something later needs to be checked.

A ten-question pause before “send”

1. What outcome am I trying to achieve?
2. Is this an approved business service and account?
3. Does the input contain personal, client or confidential information?
4. Can I remove or replace that information?
5. Do we understand the provider’s training and retention terms?
6. Is there a lawful and transparent basis for this processing?
7. Could a connected tool expose more data than intended?
8. Who will verify factual claims and citations?
9. Could an incorrect or leaked output harm someone?
10. What record of the process should be retained?

If those questions feel excessive for a routine task, that is useful information. The right answer may be to use public or synthetic data, choose a contracted service with stronger controls, or complete the task without AI.

The value of generative AI does not depend on treating every document as prompt material. Good adoption is selective: clear purpose, minimum necessary data, appropriate service, accountable review.

Further reading on The Perry

• How to choose a password manager: a practical UK guide without a league table
• Working from home when self-employed: simplified expenses or actual costs?
• Making Tax Digital for Income Tax in 2026: a practical first-year checklist

Sources and further reading

• ICO: Artificial intelligence and data protection guidance
• ICO: About the guidance on AI and data protection
• NCSC: AI and cyber security — what leaders need to know
• NCSC: Guidelines for secure AI system development
• UK government: Code of Practice for the Cyber Security of AI

Source check: 23 August 2026. Recheck provider terms and current ICO guidance for each use case.

Featured image credit: Photo by Daniil Komov on Unsplash.

The best password manager is not necessarily the one with the longest feature list. It is the one that helps its users create unique credentials, protects the stored vault appropriately and remains usable enough that people do not work around it.

That is why this is not a “top ten” ranking. Products, prices and security records change. A durable choice begins with questions that can be asked of any service.

What problem is being solved?

Most people have more accounts than passwords they can reasonably remember. Reusing one memorable password turns a breach at a minor website into a route towards email, shopping or financial accounts. Small organisations add shared logins, leavers, emergency access and the need to know who can see what.

A password manager stores credentials in an encrypted vault and can generate long, unique passwords. It may also fill credentials into the correct website, reducing the temptation to reuse or simplify them.

Start with the threat model

Decide whether the manager is for one person, a family or an organisation. Consider the devices and browsers used, the sensitivity of the accounts, whether credentials need to be shared and what happens if a device is lost.

For a small business, ask who administers the service, how access is removed when someone leaves, whether activity can be audited and how recovery works. For a household, usability across phones and computers may matter more than central administration.

Encryption and architecture

Read the provider’s security documentation. Look for a design in which the provider cannot casually read vault contents, strong published cryptography, protection for data in storage and transit, and some form of independent security assessment.

Marketing expressions such as “military-grade” are less useful than a clear explanation of what is encrypted, where keys are derived and what data remains visible. Titles, website addresses or account metadata can themselves be sensitive.

Open source is not an automatic guarantee, and closed source is not automatic evidence of weakness. The useful question is whether the design can be scrutinised and whether the provider responds transparently to findings.

The master password and multi-factor authentication

The master password protects an unusually valuable account. Make it long, unique and memorable enough to enter reliably. Do not reuse it anywhere else. Store a recovery copy securely if the chosen system’s recovery model makes that appropriate.

Enable multi-factor authentication. A passkey or security key can provide stronger phishing resistance than a one-time code, although account recovery must be planned. The vault should not become inaccessible to the business because one phone was lost or one employee left unexpectedly.

Recovery is part of security

Ask what happens when the master password is forgotten. Some “zero knowledge” systems cannot recover the vault without an emergency kit, recovery key or trusted administrator. That may be a sound security property, but only if users understand it.

For organisations, test the leaver and emergency-access process before it is needed. For families, decide whether a trusted person should be able to recover essential credentials after illness or death. Convenience without governance creates a different risk.

Autofill and phishing

A good manager fills a password only on the matching domain, which can help expose a convincing fake login page. Users should still check the address and treat unexpected login prompts with suspicion.

Do not copy passwords through insecure channels when a controlled sharing feature exists. Where a business genuinely needs shared credentials, use named access, least privilege and revocation rather than a spreadsheet or message thread.

Passkeys and the changing login landscape

Passkeys can replace passwords for supported services and are designed to resist phishing. Check whether the manager can store and synchronise them across the devices you actually use, and whether they can be exported if you change provider.

Interoperability is improving but is not complete. A password manager remains useful during the transition because most people will have a mixture of passwords, passkeys, recovery codes and secure notes.

Questions to ask before subscribing

1. Does it work reliably on every required device and browser?
2. What is encrypted, and has the design been independently assessed?
3. Does it support strong multi-factor authentication and passkeys?
4. How do recovery and emergency access work?
5. Can an organisation add, remove and audit users?
6. Can vault data be exported in a usable format?
7. Where is data stored, and what contractual terms apply?
8. How does the provider disclose and respond to security incidents?
9. What happens when the subscription ends?
10. Can the least technical user operate it without creating unsafe workarounds?

Trial the shortlisted product with low-risk accounts. Test import, autofill, a new device, offline access, recovery documentation and export. A manager that people dislike using will slowly become an incomplete manager.

A sensible baseline

Use unique generated passwords; protect the vault with a unique master password and multi-factor authentication; keep devices updated; store recovery material securely; and periodically remove old access.

A password manager concentrates risk, which deserves care. It also replaces widespread, repeated risk with something that can be governed. For most people and small organisations, that is a worthwhile exchange when the product is selected and operated thoughtfully.

Further reading on The Perry

• Before you paste it into AI: a data-safety checklist for UK small businesses
• Working from home when self-employed: simplified expenses or actual costs?
• Making Tax Digital for Income Tax in 2026: a practical first-year checklist

Sources and further reading

• NCSC: Managing your passwords
• NCSC: Updating your approach to password policy
• NCSC: Securing your users’ accounts
• NCSC: Cyber Security Small Business Guide

Source check: 23 August 2026. This article does not endorse a particular product.

Featured image credit: Photo by FlyD on Unsplash.