EvidenceSheet

MN-2.3 Procedures are followed to respond to and recover from a previously unknown risk when it is identified

Procedures are followed to respond to and recover from a previously unknown risk when it is identified. A followed procedure exists for risks that were not anticipated, covering response and recovery, and it has been use

4
artefacts
0
held by a system
1
at each review
hard
to go live
Policy repository / GRC workspace
where the evidence lives
teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

  • Post-event review and the changes it produced · Policy repository / GRC workspace

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • The documented procedure for responding to and recovering from previously unknown risks · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Records of the procedure being followed for an actual or exercised event · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • The route by which a previously unknown risk is escalated · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

This control is evidenced by people and documents, not systems. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date. Do not try to automate it.

Common gaps auditors find

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

MN-2.2 Mechanisms are in place and applied to sustain the value of deployed AI systems · MN-2.4 Mechanisms are in place and applied, and responsibilities are assigned and understood, to supersede, disengage, or deactivate AI systems that demonstrate performance or outcomes inconsistent with intended use