Industry Solutions

What should an enterprise AI security checklist for pharmaceuticals cover?

A pharmaceuticals AI security checklist covers regulated-record classification, identity and key management, residency and retention, audit logging, model governance, and quality sign-off. Manufacturing, regulatory and safety records need data-integrity controls and full traceability across long retention periods. Plugsky provides scoped keys, private deployment options and request logging for your own program.

Key facts

Access controlScoped API keys with rotation; enterprise SSO and RBAC options
DeploymentCloud, VPC, on-prem or air-gapped for regulated content
AuditabilityRequest, model and response logging for quality review trails
Data groundingEmbeddings and RAG are live for submissions, SOPs and safety content
Structured outputJSON mode returns case and review records in fixed schemas
Models30+ models behind one OpenAI-compatible API
Pricing modelFlat monthly self-serve plans; no per-token billing on self-serve
Endpoint roadmapFiles, batch and fine-tuning are coming soon

TL;DR

  • Separate controlled documents from general knowledge and public literature.
  • Design audit trails so every output is attributable to a model and a person.
  • Prefer private deployment for submissions, batch records and safety cases.
  • Apply retention that matches regulated record schedules, not chat defaults.
  • Keep qualified QA and safety staff accountable for final decisions.

How it works, step by step

  1. Inventory AI use cases across regulatory, manufacturing, safety and medical affairs.
  2. Classify content by regulated status, data-integrity requirements and confidentiality.
  3. Choose deployment per class: region cloud, VPC, on-prem or air-gapped.
  4. Issue per-function and per-application keys with rotation and central inventory.
  5. Define log fields and retention: request ID, model, sources, output, reviewer and decision.
  6. Approve a model allow-list with evaluation evidence and re-test on version changes.
  7. Require qualified review and sign-off before output enters a regulated record.
1Inventory AI usecases acrossregulatory,2Classify content byregulated status,data-integrity3Choose deploymentper class: regioncloud, VPC, on-prem4Issue per-functionand per-applicationkeys with rotation5Define log fieldsand retention:request ID, model,6Approve a modelallow-list withevaluation evidence

Try it yourself

Open the RAG architecture builder →

Regulated records and data classification

Pharmaceutical content spans published literature, internal SOPs, controlled documents, batch and manufacturing records, regulatory submissions, and safety case reports. Each class needs its own rule, and controlled records demand attributable, contemporaneous and traceable handling.

Start with literature and general SOPs, then extend to controlled and submission content only on private deployments where prompts, documents and embeddings stay inside the organisation.

Keys, functions and least privilege

Issue a distinct API key per function, application and environment. Regulatory, manufacturing, safety and commercial teams should not share credentials, and supplier or partner integrations should have their own scoped keys with clear revocation paths. Store keys in a secrets manager, rotate on a schedule, and connect enterprise SSO and RBAC options so console permissions follow personnel records.

Never place patient identifiers or batch details in prompts where retrieval can supply only the fields a task requires.

Residency, retention and regulated audit trails

Decide where processing happens and how long records live. Region selection covers many residency needs; VPC, on-prem and air-gapped deployment covers submissions and manufacturing records with stricter handling requirements. Retention applies to prompts, outputs, logs and retrieval indexes, and regulated records follow their own multi-year schedules.

Log enough to reconstruct an output: request ID, model and version, retrieved source identifiers, output, reviewer and decision. See AI audit logs for a schema.

Model governance and quality sign-off

Keep an approved model list with evaluation evidence, and re-run evaluations when versions or prompts change. Ground answers in current controlled documents with citations so reviewers can verify against the effective version. AI output stays a draft: qualified QA, regulatory or safety staff sign off before anything enters a controlled record, and the checklist should name who approves each workflow. File and batch endpoints are coming soon; plan document-heavy processes around that status.

Honest comparison

Control areaPlugsky capabilityCommon gapOwner
IdentityScoped keys per function, rotation, SSO and RBAC optionsShared department credentialsIT quality
Data boundaryCloud, VPC, on-prem or air-gapped deploymentControlled records in public toolsRegulatory affairs
RetentionConfigurable logging under regulated schedulesNo defined retentionRecords management
Audit trailRequest, model, source and reviewer loggingOutputs not attributableQuality assurance
GroundingEmbeddings and RAG over effective SOPs and submissionsSuperseded document answersDocument control
Sign-offCitations and structured output for reviewersAI drafts in controlled recordsQualified person

Frequently asked questions

Does using Plugsky make us compliant?

No. Compliance is your program. Plugsky provides deployable controls - scoped keys, private deployment, logging - that you document and validate against your own regulatory and quality obligations.

Can regulated records stay inside the company?

Yes. VPC, on-prem and air-gapped deployment keeps prompts, documents and embeddings inside your environment, and the API stays OpenAI-compatible.

What should we log?

Request IDs, model names and versions, retrieved source identifiers, outputs, reviewers and decisions, retained under regulated schedules so each output is attributable.

How do we handle superseded documents?

Refresh the retrieval index when documents change, keep effective versions in the index, and require citations so reviewers can see which version grounded an answer.

Is fine-tuning available for our templates?

Fine-tuning, files and batch endpoints are coming soon. Today, use retrieval over approved templates with JSON mode for consistent structured output.

Can we use AI in pharmacovigilance intake?

Retrieval and structured extraction can assist intake, but qualified safety staff must review and own case decisions, and the audit trail must capture both model and reviewer.

Where should a pilot start?

Pilot on public literature and general SOPs with the free plan, prove citations and attribution, then extend to controlled content on private deployment.