Privacy for the user, visibility for the organization.
You need oversight without surveillance. Alesia acts at the single moment of a potential leak. It is not a keylogger, tracker, or productivity monitor.
The boundary is structural: the message and verdict stay local; the org receives category, severity, timing, and the employee's decision. Oversight without reading chats.
- Not a keylogger or tracker
- Acts only at the moment of risk
- Employee can override warnings
- Org sees metadata, not content
Where the line actually sits
Alesia only evaluates text at the moment it's about to be sent to an AI tool. It isn't running in the background reading documents, monitoring keystrokes, or logging browsing history. When a prompt matches a risk category, the check happens on the device, the employee sees the warning, and only the outcome (what kind of risk, how severe, whether they proceeded) reaches the organization. The prompt itself is discarded on the device once the check completes, and it's never stored anywhere. There's no separate always-on monitoring mode to turn off by mistake, and no historical log of ordinary activity sitting somewhere waiting to be requested: the check-and-discard cycle is the only thing that happens, every time.
What an employee actually sees
Someone pastes a snippet of internal code into an AI assistant to debug an error. Alesia recognizes the pattern, shows a short warning explaining what it flagged, and lets them proceed anyway if it's a false positive, a common case for engineers. Their manager doesn't get a notification about it. The organization's dashboard shows one more event in the weekly aggregate: category 'source code,' severity 'medium,' overridden. No one reads the code or the conversation around it. If the same engineer triggers a handful of similar overrides over a month, the pattern shows up in the aggregate dashboard as a category trend, not as a personal record, useful for spotting a process gap, not for singling anyone out.
What changes for your team
You get real oversight without turning IT into a surveillance function. None of this requires employees to trust a promise in a policy document. The architecture itself is the guarantee, and it holds the same way for every device regardless of who's using it. That's also easier to explain to a workforce than a monitoring tool full of exceptions.
- Employees keep their working method, not a suspicion of monitoring
- No prompt or chat content ever reaches the dashboard
- Overrides are visible in aggregate, not tied to a person by default
- Trust is easier to earn when the tool literally can't read chats
Bring every AI tool your company uses under one policy.
Talk to our team. We'll scope a rollout for your organization, without compromising the privacy boundary.