Recent developments such as Anthropic’s Claude introducing legal analysis capabilities have accelerated this shift, highlighting how quickly AI is moving into legal workflows and how much sensitive information may now be processed through third-party platforms.

As we look at 2026, the challenge for legal teams is not whether AI will be used. It already is. The real question is whether firms understand where responsibility sits and what remains outside their direct control.

From specialist tools to everyday legal workflows

What has changed is not just what AI can do, but where it operates. Modern AI models now work directly inside familiar applications such as:

● Document editors

● Spreadsheets

● Presentation tools

They can summarise case material, restructure arguments and analyse large volumes of information without users leaving their normal workflow.

For legal teams, this means:

● Faster analysis

● Less manual effort

● More pressure on data handling and oversight

AI is no longer a separate system to log into, it is becoming embedded in day-to-day work.

The real risk for legal firms is scale, speed and invisibility.

One of the clearest themes from our 2026 cybersecurity outlook is that scale changes everything, particularly when AI is applied to sensitive information.

AI increases:

● The speed of decisions

● The volume of data processed

● The potential impact if something goes wrong

We are already seeing:

● AI-driven phishing that adapts daily and uses trusted language

● Automated analysis of regulated data

● Reduced reliance on humans spotting red flags in real time

However, the more complex issue for legal firms is that AI platforms often operate with authorised permissions. When a firm grants an AI tool access to its case management system, document management system or Microsoft 365 environment, that access is deliberate. The AI requires it to function.

This shifts the conversation away from blocking unauthorised access to understanding:

● What the AI platform is permitted to access

● How that data is processed and stored

● What security controls and ringfencing are managed by the SaaS provider

● How breaches or unexpected behaviour would be detected

In most cases, the configuration of the AI environment, the compute platform and the underlying security controls sit with the SaaS provider rather than the firm’s IT partner.

For legal firms, vendor due diligence and risk assessment becomes a central part of any AI adoption plan.

Why trusting users to be careful no longer works

Historically, many firms relied on:

● Training staff to recognise suspicious activity

● Policies that assume users will pause before sharing data

● Manual checks around document handling

In an AI-enabled environment, that approach is no longer sufficient.

AI tools are embedded, fast and operating within authorised access boundaries.The key question is not whether someone uploads data. It is whether the firm fully

understands what the authorised AI platform can do with that access.

Cybersecurity as an enabler for legal firms

Used properly, AI can be a powerful asset for legal teams, but only when supported by

strong governance.

For firms preparing for 2026, the focus should be on:

● Clear identity and access controls

● Strong permission management before granting AI access to systems

● Visibility over where data is being processed

● Robust vendor due diligence and risk assessment

● Incident response plans that assume AI-enabled platforms are in use

For many legal firms, this starts with strengthening policy and configuration management across core platforms such as Microsoft 365. However, it is important to recognise that controls applied within Microsoft 365 do not extend into the internal workings of an external AI platform. The security model, data handling controls and AI-specific safeguards sit with the SaaS provider.

Monitoring what an authorised AI platform is doing with data is still an emerging area across the industry. Security operations and monitoring tools are evolving, but in many cases there is currently limited visibility into how AI platforms interact with connected systems.

This is why cybersecurity is becoming less about perimeter defence and more about governance, clarity and informed decision-making. The firms that adapt best will not be the ones banning AI. They will be the ones that adopt it deliberately, with eyes open to both its value and its limits.

What legal leaders should be asking now

As AI becomes part of everyday legal work, the most important questions are practical

ones:

● Do we understand exactly what access we are granting to AI platforms?

● Have we carried out appropriate vendor due diligence on the SaaS provider’s controls?

● Do we know where our data is processed and how it is protected?

● Are we comfortable with the level of monitoring currently available?

● Are our systems designed for how people actually work today?

These are not future questions, they are already relevant.

Our perspective

AI is accelerating change across the legal sector, but it does not remove the fundamentals.

Security still comes down to clarity, consistency and control and our role is to help legal firms strengthen the environments, governance frameworks and decision-making processes around them.

The law firms that stay calm, focus on the basics and adopt AI with structured due diligence will be the ones best placed to benefit without exposing themselves to unintended risk.

2026 is not about choosing between innovation and security, it is about understanding where responsibility sits and making informed decisions accordingly.