Key Takeaways:
- AI in an audit is best suited to high-volume work: evidence intake, control mapping, early gap detection, and drafting support.
- Professional judgment, including evaluating controls, interpreting exceptions, and forming the opinion, stays with licensed auditors and authorized assessors.
- Well-applied AI means fewer duplicate requests, earlier gap visibility, and more auditor time for meaningful conversations.
- Ask your audit firm how it protects your data in AI tools and who reviews AI-generated output.
AI is showing up in every corner of security and compliance, including inside the audit firms that test your controls. More firms now describe their SOC 2® and HITRUST® engagements as “AI-enabled,” and the phrase covers a wide range, from a smarter request list to tools that promise to “automate the audit.”
If you’re preparing for your next assessment, a clear picture of what AI does during an engagement, and where people stay in charge can help determine what that means for your team’s time.
WHERE AI FITS IN A SOC 2 OR HITRUST ENGAGEMENT
Most of the effort in an audit goes into gathering, organizing, and checking evidence. That work is repetitive, high-volume, and easy to get wrong when it’s done by hand, which makes it a good fit for AI-assisted tools. In practice, AI helps with:
- Evidence intake. Sorting uploaded files, matching them to the right request, and flagging what’s still missing.
- Control mapping. Connecting one piece of evidence to every requirement it supports, across SOC 2 Trust Services Criteria, HITRUST, HIPAA, and other frameworks, so you aren’t asked for the same thing three times.
- Early gap detection. Spotting expired policies, outdated screenshots, or population mismatches before fieldwork starts, while there’s still time to fix them.
- Drafting support. Producing first drafts of request lists, status summaries, and sections of the system description for auditors to review and revise.
Each of these tasks speeds up the parts of an audit that used to create the most back-and-forth. None of them involve deciding whether your controls work.
WHERE AUDITOR JUDGMENT STAYS IN CHARGE
The core of an audit is professional judgment, and that responsibility belongs to people. A SOC 2 examination is performed by a licensed CPA firm under AICPA attestation standards, and the opinion in the report is the firm’s professional conclusion. A HITRUST validated assessment is performed by an authorized assessor and then goes through HITRUST’s own quality review before certification. Those structures assume experienced professionals are making judgment calls. Auditors remain responsible for:
- Evaluating whether a control is designed to meet the criteria
- Interpreting test results and deciding whether an exception is a true deviation
- Weighing compensating controls and business context
- Interviewing your team and understanding how work gets done
- Forming and signing the opinion
The profession is setting clear expectations here. In October 2026, the AICPA published a practice aid on AI considerations for auditors that addresses how firms use AI in their engagements, including appropriate supervision and review, quality management, and continued attention to professional judgment and skepticism. As AICPA Chief Auditor Jennifer Burns put it, “Ultimately, the auditor remains responsible for the audit and the audit opinion.” Although the practice aid focuses on financial statement audits, the same principle applies to SOC and HITRUST work. AI output is a starting point that a qualified professional reviews, tests, and owns.
WHAT THIS MEANS FOR YOUR TEAM
When AI is used well, clients notice the difference in the audit experience:
- Fewer duplicate evidence requests
- Faster answers when a document doesn’t meet the requirement
- Earlier warning on gaps, so remediation happens before fieldwork instead of during it
- More of your auditor’s time spent on conversations that improve your program
It’s also fair to ask questions. How does your audit firm protect the data you upload to AI-assisted tools? Is client data used to train models? Who reviews AI-generated output before it reaches you or your report? A firm that uses AI responsibly should be able to answer those questions plainly. We’ll dig into those questions, and your own organization’s AI governance, in upcoming posts in this series.
THE GOAL: MORE TIME FOR WHAT PEOPLE DO BEST
The best use of AI in an audit is to remove redundant fieldwork so both auditors and clients can focus on higher-value work: thinking strategically about risk, communicating clearly about findings, and making sound decisions about the program. Technology handles volume. People handle judgment.
360 Advanced is a people-first, technology-forward cybersecurity and compliance firm. Our team uses AI-enabled processes to securely gather and analyze evidence, reduce redundant fieldwork, and keep experienced professionals focused on the decisions that matter. Learn more about our SOC 2 examinations. People-First. Technology-Forward.
360 Advanced is a people-first, technology-forward cybersecurity and compliance firm and a licensed CPA firm. Our team helps organizations strengthen the SOC 2 foundation that AI assurance builds on. Learn more about how we support this new combined offering as well as more about AIUC-1 and AI agent risk. People First. Technology-Forward.
