Case Study
The Samsung ChatGPT Incident
How Samsung’s employees exposed sensitive data and what we can learn from it
What Happened
In April 2023, Samsung discovered that employees had been using ChatGPT to help with work tasks—and in the process, leaked sensitive proprietary data to OpenAI’s servers.
Within less than 20 days of allowing ChatGPT access, Samsung experienced three separate incidents where engineers exposed confidential company information.
3
Separate data leak incidents
<20
Days after allowing ChatGPT
0
Oversight or governance controls
The Three Data Leaks
What employees actually did with ChatGPT
Incident #1
Employee Role:
Semiconductor Engineer
What they did:
Pasted source code for semiconductor equipment into ChatGPT to help identify and fix errors
What was exposed:
Proprietary source code for equipment used in Samsung’s chip manufacturing process
Their intent:
Engineer wanted help debugging code faster
The problem:
Confidential IP sent to OpenAI servers with no NDAs, no data residency controls, and no ability to delete
Incident #2
Employee Role:
Hardware Engineer
What they did:
Used ChatGPT to optimize code for internal testing programs used in hardware quality assurance
What was exposed:
Internal testing program source code, including hardware specifications and quality control processes
Their intent:
Engineer wanted to improve testing efficiency
The problem:
Trade secrets exposed to third-party AI with no contractual protections
Incident #3
Employee Role:
Meeting Participant
What they did:
Recorded a confidential internal meeting and fed the transcript to ChatGPT to generate meeting notes
What was exposed:
Confidential business discussions, strategic plans, and internal decision-making
Their intent:
Employee wanted to save time on documentation
The problem:
Sensitive business intelligence sent to external AI service without approval
Samsung’s Response
Immediate Ban
Samsung immediately banned ChatGPT and other generative AI tools on company devices and networks. Employees were prohibited from using AI tools for work purposes.
Internal AI Development
Rather than rely on public AI tools, Samsung announced plans to develop their own internal AI system with proper data controls and security measures.
Policy & Training
New AI usage policies were drafted, employee training was mandated, and stricter data handling protocols were implemented across the organization.
Key Lessons for Healthcare
What the Samsung incident teaches us about shadow AI risk in healthcare
1
It Happens Fast
Samsung experienced three separate leaks in less than 20 days. Shadow AI risk doesn’t accumulate slowly—it’s immediate. Every day without governance is a day of exposure.
Healthcare Implication:
In healthcare, this isn’t source code—it’s PHI. Patient names, diagnoses, treatments. The exposure is even more serious and the regulatory consequences are severe.
2
Intent Doesn’t Matter
None of these Samsung employees were malicious. They were trying to do their jobs better and faster. But intent doesn’t change the outcome—confidential data was still exposed.
Healthcare Implication:
A well-meaning physician pasting patient notes into ChatGPT to save time creates the same HIPAA violation as intentional data theft. Compliance doesn’t care about intent.
3
Smart People Make Mistakes
These were Samsung engineers—highly educated, tech-savvy professionals. They still didn’t understand the risk or think through the implications.
Healthcare Implication:
Clinical staff, even brilliant ones, aren’t cybersecurity experts. Expecting them to intuitively know ChatGPT has no BAA and retains data is unrealistic. You need controls, not just training.
4
You Can’t Retrieve the Data
Once data is sent to ChatGPT, OpenAI retains it for training unless you have a specific enterprise agreement. Samsung couldn’t undo the exposure.
Healthcare Implication:
PHI sent to ChatGPT is gone. You can’t take it back. You can’t delete it. You can only hope OpenAI’s privacy practices hold up. That’s not a compliance strategy.
5
Bans Aren’t Sustainable
Samsung’s ban was reactive, not strategic. While they develop internal AI (which will take years), employees still need AI to compete. Shadow usage likely continues.
Healthcare Implication:
Healthcare can’t wait years for ‘perfect’ internal AI solutions. You need governance and enablement now, not prohibition and delay.
Different Context, Different Solution
Samsung’s response made sense for them
Healthcare needs a different approach
Samsung’s Approach
Makes sense for Samsung (massive R&D budget, time to build)
Ban all public AI tools
Build internal AI (multi-year project)
Wait for perfect solution
Focus on protection over enablement
Healthcare’s Better Path
Practical for healthcare (fast, compliant, enables teams)
Discover shadow AI immediately
Deploy PHI protection layer
Enable AI with governance controls
Get to compliance in weeks, not years
The Bottom Line
Samsung’s incident wasn’t unique—it’s what happens everywhere shadow AI exists.
The only difference is Samsung discovered it. Most organizations haven’t. That doesn’t mean it’s not happening—it means they don’t have visibility yet.
Ready to Discover Shadow AI?
The first step to AI governance is knowing what’s already being used. Our Shadow AI Risk Check provides a complete picture of your exposure in 60 minutes.
