AICM AtlasCSA AI Controls Matrix
BCR · Business Continuity Management and Operational Resilience
BCR-07Cloud & AI Related

Communication

Specification

Establish and maintain communication channels with all relevant stakeholders in the course of business continuity and resilience procedures.

Threat coverage

Model manipulation
Data poisoning
Sensitive data disclosure
Model theft
Model/Service Failure
Insecure supply chain
Insecure apps/plugins
Denial of Service
Loss of governance

Architectural relevance

Physical infrastructure
Network
Compute
Storage
Application
Data

Lifecycle

Preparation

Data storage, Resource provisioning, Team and expertise

Development

Not applicable

Evaluation

Not applicable

Deployment

AI applications, Orchestration

Delivery

Operations, Maintenance, Continuous monitoring

Retirement

Archiving, Data deletion, Model disposal

Ownership / SSRM

PI

Owned by the Cloud Service Provider (CSP)

The Cloud Service Provider (CSP) is responsible for the design, development, implementation, and enforcement of the control to mitigate security, privacy, or compliance risks associated with cloud computing (processing, storage, and networking) technologies in the context of the services or products they develop and offer. The CSP is responsible and accountable for implementing the control within its own infrastructure/environment. The CSP is responsible for enabling the customer and/or upstream partner to implement/configure the control within their risk management approach. The CSP is accountable for ensuring that its providers upstream implement the control related to the service/product developed and offered by the CSP.

Model

Owned by the Model Provider (MP)

The model provider (MP) designs, develops, and implements the control as part of their services or products to mitigate security, privacy, or compliance risks associated with the Large Language Model (LLM). Model Providers are entities that develop, train, and distribute foundational and fine-tuned AI models for various applications. They create the underlying AI capabilities that other actors build upon. Model Providers are responsible for model architecture, training methodologies, performance characteristics, and documentation of capabilities and limitations. They operate at the foundation layer of the AI stack and may provide direct API access to their models. Examples: OpenAI (GPT, DALL-E, Whisper), Anthropic(Claude), Google(Gemini), Meta(Llama), as well as any customized model.

Orchestrated

Shared Model Provider-Orchestrated Service Provider (Shared MP-OSP)

The MP and OSP are jointly responsible and accountable for the design, development, implementation, and enforcement of the control to mitigate security, privacy, or compliance risks associated with Large Language Model (LLM)/GenAI technologies in the context of the services or products they develop and offer.

Application

Owned by the Application Provider (AP)

The Application Provider (AP) is responsible for the design, development, implementation, and enforcement of the control to mitigate security, privacy, or compliance risks associated with Large Language Model (LLM)/GenAI technologies in the context of the services or products they develop and offer. The AP is responsible and accountable for the implementation of the control within its own infrastructure/environment. If the control has downstream implications on the users/customers, the AP is responsible for enabling the customer and/or upstream partner in the implementation/configuration of the control within their risk management approach. The AP is accountable for carrying out the due diligence on its upstream providers (e.g MPs, Orchestrated Services) to verify that they implement the control as it relates to the service/product develop and offered by the AP. These providers build and offer end-user applications that leverage generative AI models for specific tasks such as content creation, chatbots, code generation, and enterprise automation. These applications are often delivered as software-as-a-service (SaaS) solutions. These providers focus on user interfaces, application logic, domain-specific functionality, and overall user experience rather than underlying model development. Example: OpenAI (GPTs,Assistants), Zapier, CustomGPT, Microsoft Copilot (integrated into Office products), Jasper (AI-driven content generation), Notion AI (AI-enhanced productivity tools), Adobe Firefly (AI-generated media), and AI-powered customer service solutions like Amazon Rufus, as well as any organization that develops its AI-based application internally.

Implementation guidelines

[All Actors]
1. Stakeholder Mapping: Create comprehensive matrices identifying all parties affected by various disruption types. Define specific information needs for technical teams, business units, and external partners. Establish clear ownership for different communication streams.

2. Communication Infrastructure: Implement security protocols for sensitive updates during vulnerability-related events. Test all notification systems at least quarterly with cross-organizational verification.

3. Preparatory Materials: Develop concise message templates focused on critical decision-making information. Prepare explanatory resources that translate technical situations into business impact terms. Establish standard formats for exchanging structured incident data between teams.

4. Structured Updates: Maintain consistent update format enabling quick identification of new developments.  Activate alerts through multiple channels simultaneously to ensure reach. Include precise impact descriptions with affected and unaffected functions clearly differentiated.

5. Cross-Functional Coordination: Form joint assessment teams with representatives from each entity in the service chain. Maintain dedicated liaisons responsible for translating technical details to business implications.

6. Continuous Refinement: Gather structured feedback on communication effectiveness after each significant event. Conduct periodic simulations focused specifically on information exchange. Measure and track key metrics including time-to-notify and message comprehension. Evolve communication strategies based on technological changes and organizational learning.

Auditing guidelines

1. Examine the policy for determining stakeholders and participants.

2. Determine if the organization has identified stakeholders and participants.

3. Examine the procedures for communication with identified stakeholders and participants.

4. Verify the establishment of automated notification systems for infrastructure status changes, reviewing the configuration of alerts, distribution lists, and escalation paths.

5. Review evidence of communication templates prepared for different infrastructure incident scenarios, ensuring they include appropriate technical detail and clarity for different stakeholder groups.

6. Assess the implementation of infrastructure status dashboards or notification systems, confirming their functionality, accessibility during disruptions, and inclusion of relevant infrastructure components.

7. Verify documentation of contact information for all dependent stakeholders is maintained, regularly updated, and accessible during outages.

8. Review records from past infrastructure incidents or exercises to confirm that communication procedures were followed, stakeholders were notified promptly, and regular updates were provided during extended 
incidents.

9. Confirm that alternative communication channels are established for scenarios where primary communication systems are unavailable.

Standards mappings

ISO 42001No Gap
All 42001: A.8.5
All 42001: A.10
Addendum

N/A

EU AI ActPartial Gap
Article 17 (i) (procedures for reporting serious incidents)
Article 55 (c) (reporting serious incidents)
Article 73 (reporting serious incidents)
Addendum

Establish communication with stakeholders and participants in the course of business continuity and resilience procedures.

NIST AI 600-1Partial Gap
GV-2.1-001
GV-6.2-003
Addendum

Extend the communication requirements to explicitly cover the communication of business continuity events and procedures—including specifying roles, points‐of‐contact, and escalation channels—beyond standard GAI incident scenarios.

BSI AIC4No Gap
C4 PC-01
BCM-01
BCM-03
Addendum

N/A

AI-CAIQ questions (1)

BCR-07.1

Are communication channels with all relevant stakeholders established and maintained in the course of business continuity and resilience procedures?