Ethics
Is AI safe for client data? What lawyers actually need to check
A plain-English checklist for whether a legal AI tool is safe for confidential client data — training, retention, encryption, and the questions to ask a vendor.
"Is it safe to put my client's information into an AI tool?" is the right question — and the honest answer is "it depends entirely on the tool's contract and architecture, not on whether it says 'secure' on the homepage." Here is what actually determines the answer, and the questions to ask before you paste a single client fact.
The four things that decide it
- Does the tool train on your inputs? This is the big one. Consumer chatbot tiers often reserve the right to use your inputs to improve their models. Enterprise and paid API tiers usually rule it out in their terms, though they may still log requests briefly for abuse monitoring. The difference is the contract, not the brand.
- How long is your data retained, and can you delete it? Ask for the retention period and whether you can request deletion. Indefinite retention with no deletion path is a confidentiality problem under Model Rule 1.6 (see ABA Formal Opinion 512).
- Is data encrypted in transit and at rest? TLS in transit and strong encryption at rest (e.g. AES-256) is table stakes. Draftiro's database and file-storage provider, Supabase, encrypts data at rest.
- Where does the data live, and who are the subprocessors? You should be able to see the list of subprocessors and the hosting region. Draftiro stores data in AWS us-east-1 via Supabase and publishes its subprocessor list; AI processing by Google is not limited to a US region.
What ABA Op. 512 requires of you
ABA Formal Opinion 512 ties AI use to your existing duty of confidentiality (Rule 1.6). In plain terms: do not feed client information into a tool that retains it for training without informed consent. The opinion doesn't ban AI — it asks you to understand the tool and protect the confidences. A tool whose terms rule out training on your inputs makes that analysis simpler — you still need to know what the provider retains and decide whether client consent is needed.
The questions to ask any legal AI vendor
- "Do you train models on my inputs? Show me the clause."
- "What is your data retention period, and how do I delete my data?"
- "Is data encrypted at rest, and with what?"
- "Who are your subprocessors and what region is my data in?"
- "Do you have a DPA I can sign?"
Where Draftiro stands
Draftiro does not use your matter content to train AI models. It uses Google's paid Gemini API, whose terms bar Google from using your prompts and responses to improve its products; Google may keep requests for a limited period for abuse monitoring, and for up to 30 days when a chat uses Google Search grounding. Data is stored with Supabase in AWS us-east-1 and encrypted at rest by that provider, and firm data is separated with Postgres row-level security. A data processing agreement is being finalized — contact us if your firm needs one. Draftiro does not hold a SOC 2 report and has not engaged an auditor — we won't claim otherwise. See the full posture on our security page and Privacy Policy.
None of this is legal advice about your specific duties — it's the checklist we'd want a careful solo to run before trusting any tool with a client's confidences.
This article was published by the Draftiro team and reviewed by our attorney advisors. See our team and how we track AI ethics opinions.
Try Draftiro free