EvidenceSheet

MS-2.7 AI system security and resilience as identified in the MAP function are evaluated and documented

AI system security and resilience – as identified in the MAP function – are evaluated and documented. Security and resilience evaluation addresses the AI-specific attack surface, adversarial input, poisoning, extraction

4
artefacts
0
held by a system
0
at each review
hard
to go live
Document repository
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

none for this control

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

  • Evaluation results for AI-specific security risks, including adversarial input and data poisoning · Document repository
  • Resilience testing showing behaviour under unexpected adverse events or environment change · Policy repository / GRC workspace
  • Model and data supply chain integrity checks · Document repository
  • Documentation of the evaluation traced to the security risks mapping identified · Document repository

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

MS-2.6 AI system is evaluated regularly for safety risks as identified in the MAP function, is demonstrated to be safe, its residual negative risk does not exceed the risk tolerance, and it can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits · MS-2.8 Risks associated with transparency and accountability as identified in the MAP function are examined and documented