By The short answer: Microsoft 365 Copilot and Gemini in Workspace are designed to respect the signed-in user's existing file access, subject to additional controls. Their Microsoft and Google documentation explains those boundaries. What changes is the effort needed to find information: a widely shared folder buried four levels deep may become easier to retrieve and summarize. Before connecting an assistant, review who can already open what, then check the identity, source scope and permissions the connection will use.
The assistant inherits access, with additional limits
Read the documentation for the product you intend to connect.
Microsoft's data protection architecture for Copilot says SharePoint and OneDrive controls influence what Copilot can discover and reference without changing user permissions. When encryption is applied, the user needs EXTRACT and VIEW usage rights for Copilot to interact with the content. User-defined sensitivity label permissions can also block Copilot agents from reading a file. A label alone does not necessarily mean a file is encrypted.
Google's guide to Gemini's Workspace access says that if a Drive owner disables download, copy and print, Gemini cannot access that file even when it is shared with you. Delegated Gmail inboxes are also excluded. Administrators and smart feature settings can impose further limits.
For these products, existing access is the starting point. For a custom assistant, verify the identity and permissions used by the implementation rather than assuming it runs as each staff member.
Why that still produces surprises
An old sharing decision can outlive the reason for it. Someone opens a folder to the whole company for a meeting, and nobody revisits it.
Organization-wide access
Microsoft's Everyone except external users report tracks recent sharing with the internal-user group, through site membership or direct item sharing. The displayed activity report lists the top 100 sites by activity over the last 28 days, with security settings and the primary administrator. Its downloadable report can include more sites.
That window matters. A folder shared years ago may not appear as recent activity. Microsoft recommends starting with a current site-permissions snapshot, then using activity reports to monitor changes.
Sites nobody owns any more
A project wraps up, but its files remain accessible after the person responsible leaves. Microsoft's readiness guidance includes inactive site policies and site attestation, which asks owners to check ownership, members, permissions and sharing settings.
Search and direct access could already expose those files. An assistant can retrieve and summarize relevant permitted content, making forgotten oversharing easier to encounter. Google's privacy hub describes using relevant Workspace content based on the prompt, rather than reading every accessible file for every answer.
A worked example
Consider a hypothetical property management company in Edmonton with 40 staff and nine years of SharePoint files. Operations wants an assistant so site staff can ask about tenant procedures.
During testing, a staff account asks what the maintenance coordinator earns. The assistant retrieves a 2023 compensation review from a folder shared with everyone internal for a board meeting and never restricted afterwards. In this example, no permission was broken. The problem was the access already granted.
A recent-activity report alone could miss that old sharing decision. Review current permissions and the intended sources, then test whether each staff role can retrieve sensitive material.
What to check before you connect anything
Complete the review before go-live, allowing time for remediation and control changes to take effect.
- Start with a current permissions snapshot, including existing organization-wide access. Review recent sharing activity and the sources intended for the assistant. The top 20 activity results are a starting point, not a complete audit. In Drive, review the relevant files, folders and sharing settings.
- Name the folders or sites the assistant may use. Verify the account identity and connector grants behind that scope. A defined source list is easier to test and explain to staff.
- Use discovery controls while reviewing access. Microsoft's Restricted Content Discovery temporarily limits selected SharePoint sites in organization-wide search and Copilot discovery without changing permissions. It requires applicable Copilot licensing and SharePoint Advanced Management, does not cover OneDrive sites, and takes time to propagate. Site-context searches and some interactions with content already in use remain outside its scope. It is not a replacement for correcting permissions.
- Correct effective access to payroll, health information, legal advice and private tenant, client or employee records. Configure appropriate encryption or data loss prevention controls and test retrieval boundaries. Labeling or moving a file alone does not establish that access has been removed.
- Confirm training and retention separately. OpenAI's enterprise privacy page says business-product and API data is not used for model training by default. Retention depends on the product and configuration; API zero data retention requires eligible endpoints and a qualifying use case. Google's Workspace privacy hub says Workspace content is not human reviewed or used for generative AI training outside the domain without permission. These statements do not answer who in your business can access a file.
- Confirm logging with your administrator. Microsoft documents audit capabilities for Copilot prompts, responses and referenced content. Check what your configuration captures and retains.
- Test representative staff roles, including the least privileged role. Include explicit attempts to retrieve prohibited content. One leadership account or one restricted account does not establish the boundaries for everyone else.
Where this sits in Canadian privacy guidance
Accountability does not transfer to the tool. The joint generative AI principles from Canada's privacy commissioners, including Alberta's, place accountability for decisions with the organization rather than the automated system supporting them.
The organization remains accountable. Designate an owner for the permissions review, deployment approval and ongoing monitoring, so someone knows which sources are approved and who checks changes.
Where Lumin fits
Access scoping is part of how we build. Our AI integration work starts with the task and source information before agreeing to a connection.
- We configure approved information and supported tool access, with permissions and human approval points defined for the workflow.
- We test representative tasks and failure cases with your team, then provide an operating guide, team training and a maintenance owner at handover.
If you are considering an internal assistant and are unsure what it could read, book a discovery call and we will look at the sharing picture first.