Urgent.News

What's breaking now, across thousands of outlets.

AI

Data Residency and Sovereignty for Enterprise AI: SaaS, On-Prem, and Air-Gapped Deployments

When a team ships its first application backed by a large language model, security tends to live in the prompt. Someone writes "do not reveal personal data" into the system message and hopes the model complies. That approach breaks down quickly. Models are probabilistic, prompts can be overridden by cleverly crafted user input, and the same model is often reached by a dozen different applications…

The article discusses guardrails as a disciplined alternative to relying on language models to police themselves. Guardrails are programmatic checks that sit outside the model, inspecting data flowing to and from it. They either block the data or rewrite it when a rule is violated. Guardrails differ from simply instructing the model through prompts because their behavior is repeatable and auditable.

There are two primary settings for guardrails: inspecting data before sending it to the model (input guardrails) and inspecting output after the model responds (output guardrails). Both types of guardrails are essential for comprehensive protection. By placing guardrails in the request path, AI gateway guardrails provide a single point of enforcement for all requests.

When a tool is called instead of a model, pre-tool guardrails run before execution and post-tool guardrails run after the tool returns a result. Guardrails can either validate (block if a rule is violated) or mutate (rewrite data if rules are violated). The choice between validation and mutation depends on the specific use case, with mutation allowing dangerous parts of a request to be removed while still keeping the request alive.

Deciding what a guardrail checks is only part of the design. Handling guardrail failures is also crucial. Three enforcement strategies are available: strictly enforcing guardrails, allowing requests to pass if the guardrail errors, or logging guardrail actions without blocking traffic. Starting with an audit mode helps measure false positives before enforcing guardrails in production.

Written by urgent.news from Dev.to's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.

Read the original at dev.to →

More in AI

NEAR AI was breached through the engine running its agents, not the prompt

Humanbound's engine and CLI are open source: github.com/humanbound/humanbound NEAR AI disclosed on 9 November that an attacker used a remote code execution flaw in SGLang, its model-serving engine, to…

  • NEAR AI breached via SGLang engine flaw, not prompt
  • Attack obtained code execution on inference server
  • Personal data, AWS keys compromised, keys revoked

More from Wednesday 11 November →