AI Usage Governance

AI is already in every team.
Most can't see it.

Finance, HR, legal and operations are all using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and Copilot. Very few organisations can say which tools are in use, what data is being sent, or whether a session is a person or an autonomous agent.

Request a demo Book a call
Under 30 minutes to deploy
No proxy, no SSL inspection
Monitor-only until you say otherwise
ISO 42001 · NIST AI RMF · EU AI Act · MITRE ATLAS
Senior-only delivery
The problem

Banning it doesn't work.
Nor does hoping.

CASB, DLP and secure web gateways were built for documents and email. GRC platforms attest to controls without watching anything live. None of them can tell you what your people typed into an AI tool this morning, or what came back.

Finance pastes the customer list into ChatGPT to tidy it up.

HR summarises a résumé and a performance file in a free AI tool.

An AI notetaker nobody approved sits in on a leadership meeting and keeps the recording.

Governance questions from the executive get asked, but cannot be answered.

An autonomous agent is given an account, a key and standing access, and nobody owns it.

27
AI-powered applications running in the average enterprise
56%
Of those carry IT approval. The rest arrived because someone needed to get a job done
24–48 h
Typical time from deployment to the first meaningful data-loss finding

Sources: BetterCloud, 2026 State of SaaS Report. Deployment figures from Avertro's published product documentation.

Visibility has to come first. You cannot write a rule for a tool you did not know was in use, or show an auditor evidence of a control you never had.

What good looks like

From "we think we have control"
to "here's the proof."

Three rungs, and only in this order. You cannot act on what you cannot see, and you cannot prove what you have not acted on.

1
Find it See

A browser extension covering a watchlist of 40 AI providers, plus an optional endpoint sensor for desktop apps and command-line tools. Unapproved tools surface the first time anyone opens one. Every user without coverage lands in a remediation queue, so you know what the blind spots are. No proxy, no SSL inspection, nothing re-routed.

2
Put rules around it Act

Rules on prompts and pastes catch personal information, credentials and your own custom patterns. Accounts start in monitor-only, so you see the real picture before you change anyone's day. Behavioural baselines flag the unusual, with a plain-English explanation of why someone was flagged. You decide if and when enforcement is switched on.

3
Evidence it Prove

Control coverage mapped to ISO 42001, NIST AI RMF, the EU AI Act and MITRE ATLAS, with an auditor view and a single 0 to 100 posture score the board can follow month to month. Attestations carry a name, a status and a timestamp, so governance questions get answered with evidence rather than assertions.

What changes

Same organisation.
Two very different conversations.

Today
  • You believe AI use is "probably fine" because nobody has complained
  • Your AI policy exists, and nobody can tell you whether it is being followed
  • Sensitive data leaves in a paste, and you find out when someone mentions it
  • An auditor asks how you govern AI use, and you describe your intentions
  • Agent accounts accumulate standing access with no owner and no review
With monitoring in place
  • You have a list of every AI tool in use, and who is using it
  • Policy is enforced by rules you set, and exceptions are visible
  • An alert fires when credentials or customer data are pasted into an AI tool
  • The auditor gets a control-by-control record with dates and attestors
  • Every agent is inventoried, with its capabilities and delegation trail
Why now

Four frameworks now
expect an answer.

A written AI policy on its own stopped being enough. Each of these now asks you to show something, and three of the four apply directly to Australian organisations.

SMB1001:2027
Gold requires a policy for the responsible and secure use of AI. Platinum requires a full AI governance framework covering approved and prohibited use, human oversight, agentic boundaries and monitoring. Diamond goes further again: technical controls on unauthorised AI use, with the logs reviewed quarterly.
ASD Essentials
The Essentials series carries a dedicated AI chapter. It applies whether an organisation consumes, develops or deploys AI, treats AI systems as assets in scope, and names sensitive data being provided to unapproved AI services as a risk. The identities and permissions given to AI agents must be governed like any other access pathway.
ISO/IEC 42001
The certifiable AI management system standard. The one an auditor, an insurer or a large customer is most likely to ask about first, and the one a tender will start naming.
NIST AI RMF
Govern, Map, Measure, Manage. The reference model for demonstrating that an AI risk process actually exists, rather than describing one.
How we deliver it

All of this runs on CyberHQ.ai.

CyberHQ.ai is an AI governance platform built by an Australian cyber technology company. Coastal Cyber is a strategic partner. You licence the platform; we do the governance work around it.

Deploy

Scoping and rollout, coverage checks and the blind spots that fall out of them, so the picture you get back is a complete one rather than a partial one.

Configure

Policies and data-loss rules set to your risk appetite and your actual obligations, not a default template. Monitor first, enforce when you are ready.

Run

Ongoing triage, governance, framework alignment and the board reporting that falls out of it. The AI policy that goes with it, written to match what the platform shows.

Worth saying plainly. Coastal Cyber is a strategic partner of Avertro and is paid by them when a client we introduce takes a licence. We do not resell the platform and we do not implement or operate technology. You contract with Avertro directly for the licence, and with us for the advisory work. If the platform is not the right fit for your situation, we will tell you so.
Request a demo
Common questions

The questions people
actually ask.

It is monitoring of AI usage, not general employee monitoring. The scope is AI platforms on a defined watchlist, and what is sent to them. There is an employee-facing dashboard so staff can see their own activity. How you communicate it matters more than the technology: we help you write the staff-facing explanation and the policy before anything is switched on, and in most Australian workplaces that is a consultation obligation, not an optional courtesy.
No, and most organisations should not start there. Accounts begin in monitor-only mode. The point is to make AI use safe enough to say yes to, not to shut it down. Enforcement is a decision you make later, with real data in front of you, rather than a setting that lands on your people on day one.
Visibility, alerting and evidence do, across the fleet. The browser extension runs on Chrome and Edge, and the endpoint sensor supports Windows 10 and 11. Be aware that some active enforcement actions, paste blocking in particular, are available on macOS and Linux ahead of Windows. If your fleet is Windows and hard blocking is the outcome you want, raise it with us early and we will tell you exactly what is and is not available today rather than find out during a rollout.
No. There is no proxy, no SSL inspection and no certificate on your network, so there is nothing to conflict with an existing CASB or secure web gateway. It adds the AI-specific context those tools were never built to carry, and feeds signals out to your SIEM, SOAR, Jira or ServiceNow through a documented API.
Two separate things. The platform licence is per user per month, in three tiers, billed to you by Avertro. The advisory work is scoped by us against what you actually need, and quoted fixed where the scope allows. A short pilot is usually the cheapest way to find out whether the numbers justify a full rollout. Ask on the call and we will give you both figures.
Your tenancy is yours, and the platform generates a Data Protection Impact Assessment template from your own sensing configuration so your privacy team has something concrete to review. Data residency, retention and the vendor's own terms are exactly the sort of thing you should not take on trust from a brochure: bring them to the call and we will go through them with you against your Privacy Act obligations before you sign anything.
Find out what is actually running

Most organisations are surprised
by their own first report.

A short demo, then a pilot if it is worth it. You will see your real AI footprint within a day or two of switching it on, and we will tell you honestly whether it is a problem worth spending money on.

Request a demo Book a call instead

Coastal Cyber · Sunshine Coast, QLD · dj@coastalcyber.com.au