Decision inputs
Facts that change the policy answer
Within it and security, this request uses public reports, indicators and source notes to produce a threat brief for internal teams. Both belong in the submission before any policy route is trusted.
- 1Task and owner
- Threat intelligence analyst wants to summarise public threat intelligence. Name who owns the finished a threat brief for internal teams; ownership should not disappear because AI helped produce it.
- 2Information involved
- Public reports, indicators and source notes. Account for every route by which the tool receives the material, including plug-ins and linked storage.
- 3Tool and account
- An approved company account. Treat a new plug-in or connector as a change to the approved setup.
- 4Intended result
- The expected result is a threat brief for internal teams. Its destination matters: private working material creates a different consequence from a sent, published or automated result.
- 5Consequence if it is wrong
- Unverified attribution or stale indicators can be repeated as fact. A familiar task still needs escalation when this consequence becomes plausible.
- 6Human review
- threat intelligence owner should inspect, change, reject or stop the result. Their role should include checking source facts, correcting errors and refusing the proposed use.
Possible policy routes
The task name alone cannot decide it.
A published workplace policy can return different answers for the same task. These are the practical branches worth encoding.
A routine policy route may be possible
The lower-friction route begins when the exact account is approved, only the minimum public security information is used, a threat brief for internal teams remains within the stated purpose, and threat intelligence owner reviews it before use.
Approval may be required
Send the request for approval if the account or data handling is uncertain, unverified attribution or stale indicators can be repeated as fact, or a threat brief for internal teams reaches people or systems beyond the requester’s authority.
The request may need to stop or change
The proposed use should pause if restricted information would enter an unapproved service, the output would act before threat intelligence owner can intervene, or rate source confidence and confirm indicators before operational use cannot be maintained. Consider less information, a controlled account or a non-AI process.
Request checklist
Questions to ask before using the tool
- 01
Does the selected account retain or reuse anything supplied while trying to summarise public threat intelligence?
- 02
What is the most sensitive element in public reports, indicators and source notes, and does the tool need it?
- 03
Will a threat brief for internal teams remain working material, reach another person or make another system act?
- 04
What evidence will threat intelligence owner use to accept, correct or reject the result?
- 05
Which change in tool, data, purpose or impact would require a fresh request?
Worked request
What the employee should submit
This example supplies decision facts without pasting the underlying material into the approval record.
- requester
- threat intelligence analyst
- task
- Use AI to summarise public threat intelligence.
- information
- public reports, indicators and source notes
- tool
- An approved company account
- frequency
- Recurring work
- region
- Where the work and affected people are located
- purpose
- Analyse
- impact
- Internal work
- review
- Complete human review
- owner
- threat intelligence owner
Useful safeguards
Controls that fit this request
- ✓
Rate source confidence and confirm indicators before operational use
- ✓
Document why each part of public reports, indicators and source notes is necessary before making it available to the tool.
- ✓
Treat a new purpose, region, data source or recipient as a new request rather than silently extending this one.
- ✓
Link the completed check to the applicable policy version and append later reassessments separately.
Questions people ask
About this AI use
Is using AI to summarise public threat intelligence automatically allowed?
Permission depends on the facts submitted for this request. A different tool, information class, region or use of a threat brief for internal teams can produce another route.
Which facts should be submitted before work begins?
Describe a threat brief for internal teams, identify public reports, indicators and source notes, name the exact tool and account, explain who will receive or rely on the output, and state how threat intelligence owner will review it.
What should remain after the decision?
Link the completed check to the applicable policy version and append later reassessments separately. A classification and controlled reference may be enough when copying public reports, indicators and source notes would create unnecessary risk.