Guides › Copilot security review
Microsoft 365 Copilot Security Review Checklist: Permissions, Purview, Retention and Agents to Confirm
A Microsoft 365 Copilot security review is mostly a review of your own tenant. Microsoft's commitments on training, retention and processing are settled by the Data Protection Addendum and apply to the service as a processor; what decides the exposure is what the tenant's permissions already allow, how much content carries sensitivity labels, which Purview policies are in force, whether web grounding and Copilot Studio agents are enabled, and whether anyone has measured what Copilot returns before users do. This checklist covers Microsoft's side in one table and the tenant's side in another, gives the configuration sequence, and names what remains after both are done, as of October 2026.
Scope the review to the Copilot you are enabling
“Copilot” covers several products with different data terms. Microsoft 365 Copilot and Copilot Chat used by an organization fall under enterprise data protection: the DPA and Product Terms with Microsoft as processor, no training of foundation models on prompts, responses or Graph data, and interactions stored and auditable in Microsoft 365. Consumer Copilot and personal Microsoft accounts are outside that, and employees have them. Copilot Studio agents and agents published into Copilot carry their own privacy terms and their own knowledge sources. And models from other providers can now be selected inside Copilot, with Microsoft stating that Anthropic models are excluded from the EU Data Boundary and in-country processing commitments. The review should name which of these is being approved, because the answers below differ. The provider policy comparison puts Copilot beside ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini if the review spans platforms.
Microsoft's side: the commitments
These rows are what Microsoft's documentation states as of October 2026. They need to be confirmed against your subscription, because Microsoft notes that the specific controls vary by it.
Your side: the tenant
This is where the review spends its time. Each row is a question about the tenant, what a defensible answer looks like, and the Microsoft tooling that produces it. The Copilot oversharing guide covers the first three rows in depth.
Configuration before go-live
The sequence below assumes SharePoint Advanced Management is available, which Microsoft positions as the preparation tooling for Copilot and agents. Steps one to four are reporting and remediation; five to eight are the controls and the measurement loop.
What the review cannot settle
Three things remain after both tables are green. The gap between what a user is authorized to open and what they were meant to see is a human judgment per site, and the reports only find the candidates. Purview's audit records show which resources Copilot touched per interaction, with sensitivity label IDs, host app, agent and model provider, which is strong evidence of what happened and still not a comparison against entitlement; the entitlement question is answered by a refusal test under real identities, repeated before each expansion. And anything that leaves the Microsoft 365 service boundary, whether a Bing web query, an Anthropic model selected inside Copilot, an agent calling an external system, or an employee pasting an answer into a personal account, is governed by other terms or by none. The ChatGPT Enterprise and Claude Enterprise checklists apply the same structure to the other two platforms most reviews cover.
Where Hardshell sits
Hardshell measures and governs the parts of this that the tenant controls cannot. Before rollout it tests what Copilot and the agents around it can be made to disclose under real identities and maps each finding to MITRE ATLAS technique IDs. For data connected to Copilot, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or an internal assistant, it enforces each user's existing permissions at query time without migrating the data, substitutes stand-ins for real identifiers before content reaches a third-party model, and records every retrieval under opaque IDs. It deploys as a cloud service, in a private cloud, or as an offline bundle.
Frequently asked questions
Does Microsoft 365 Copilot train on our data?
No. Microsoft states that prompts, responses and data accessed through Microsoft Graph are not used to train foundation models, and that Microsoft 365 Copilot used by organizations falls under the Data Protection Addendum and Product Terms with Microsoft as processor.
Does Copilot respect our SharePoint permissions?
Yes. Copilot can only summarize or reference content the user is authorized to access. The exposure is what those permissions already allow, which in most tenants is more than intended; measure it with the SharePoint Advanced Management reports before enabling Copilot.
Can we stop Copilot from using documents with a particular sensitivity label?
A Purview DLP policy scoped to the Microsoft 365 Copilot location can prevent Copilot from processing items that carry specified labels, for SharePoint and OneDrive files and emails; Microsoft notes the item may still appear in citations. Coverage depends on label coverage, which the sensitivity label snapshot report shows.
Is Copilot covered by the EU Data Boundary?
Microsoft lists the EU Data Boundary among Copilot's commitments with two stated exclusions: web search queries, which go to Bing as a separate service with identifiers removed, and Anthropic models offered inside Copilot. Confirm the scope for your subscription and the models you enable.
What does the Copilot audit log record?
Purview records each interaction with the user, time, hosting app, agent, model provider, and the resources Copilot accessed with their sensitivity label IDs. Prompt and response text are not described as part of the record. Retention follows your audit retention policies, so set one.
Should we restrict Copilot to a list of sites?
Restricted SharePoint Search, the allow-list approach, is capped at 100 sites, is described by Microsoft as not a security boundary, and can no longer be newly enabled since July 31, 2026. Use Restricted Content Discovery per site as a temporary measure while permissions are fixed, and treat the fix as the control.