AICM AtlasCSA AI Controls Matrix
CEK · Cryptography, Encryption & Key Management
CEK-12Cloud & AI Related

Key Rotation

Specification

Rotate cryptographic keys in accordance with the calculated cryptoperiod, which includes provisions for considering the risk of information disclosure and legal and regulatory requirements.

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

Development

Not applicable

Evaluation

Not applicable

Deployment

Orchestration, AI Services supply chain, AI applications

Delivery

Operations, Maintenance, Continuous monitoring

Retirement

Archiving, Data deletion, Model disposal

Ownership / SSRM

PI

Shared Cloud Service Provider-Model Provider (Shared CSP-MP)

The CSP and MP 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.

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

Shared Orchestrated Service Provider-Application Provider (Shared OSP-AP)

The OSP and AP 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.

Implementation guidelines

[All Actors]
Applies to all Roles (Baseline) before application of role context.
1. Establish and document policies and procedures for Cryptography, Encryption, and Key Management.

2. Approve the policies and procedures through formal governance processes (e.g., security committee, CISO).

3. Communicate the policies and procedures to all relevant stakeholders.

4. Apply the approved policies and procedures to all systems, services, and processes under the role’s control.

5. Evaluate the effectiveness of policy and procedure implementation using internal audits, technical reviews, 
and encryption control validations.

6. Review and update the policies and procedures at least annually, or when significant system, model, or 
regulatory changes occur.

Auditing guidelines

1. Verify that the CSP rotates cryptographic keys in accordance with defined cryptoperiods, considering the risk of information disclosure and legal or regulatory requirements across cloud infrastructure, storage, and key management services.

2. Confirm that cryptoperiods are formally defined for each key type based on key usage, data classification, risk exposure, and applicable compliance requirements.

3. Verify that automated key rotation is implemented in supported services (e.g., KMS, HSM, database encryption), and manual key rotation follows documented procedures.

4. Review configuration baselines and key management system settings to ensure rotation schedules are enforced consistently and override attempts are monitored and approved.

5. Confirm that access to initiate or configure key rotation is limited to authorized cloud operations or security teams, following role-based access control and approval workflows.

6. Validate that cryptographic keys used in CSP services supporting AI workloads (e.g., encrypted model storage, prompt logging, inference caching) follow rotation schedules aligned with defined cryptoperiods.

7. Review audit logs to confirm that key rotation events are logged with relevant metadata (e.g., key ID, time, rotation trigger, system ID, user ID) and retained for auditability.

8. Confirm that rotated keys are distributed securely across CSP infrastructure and dependent services, ensuring continuity and preventing exposure of key material.

9. Verify that superseded or expired keys are securely archived or destroyed based on CSP data classification and compliance retention policies.

10. Confirm that the CSP coordinates key rotation schedules with downstream entities (e.g., APs, AICs) and evaluates upstream cryptographic dependencies to ensure uninterrupted encryption and trust continuity.

From CCM:
Consider the symmetric vs. asymmetric key rotation capabilities of CSPs and that an appropriate rotation process is adopted.
1. Confirm that policy and procedures include a requirement for regular key rotation.
2. Identify keys used within the organization. Confirm that these keys are part of the rotation process.
3. Review the key rotation process to confirm logging and monitoring of key rotation, tracking of date, time, encryption algorithm used, and authorization process used.

Standards mappings

ISO 42001Partial Gap
No Mapping for ISO 42001
ISO 27001: No Mapping
ISO 27002: Control 8.24
Addendum

Add a control requiring AI systems to rotate cryptographic keys in accordance with their calculated cryptoperiod, incorporating provisions for assessing the risk of information disclosure and adhering to legal and regulatory requirements, addressing the gap in ISO 42001:2023’s lack of specific key rotation mandates. Include guidance on cryptoperiod calculation and risk-based rotation, enhancing ISO 27001 (A.8.24) and ISO 27002 (8.24) for AI-specific key lifecycle management.

EU AI ActFull Gap
No Mapping
Addendum

Cover the AICM control.

NIST AI 600-1Full Gap
No Mapping
Addendum

No (implicit/explicit) reference to cryptography, encryption, or key management is made in the NIST AI 600-1 standard, let alone to the specific requirement of key rotation.

BSI AIC4No Gap
CRY-04
Addendum

N/A

AI-CAIQ questions (1)

CEK-12.1

Are cryptographic keys rotated based on a cryptoperiod calculated while considering information disclosure risks, and legal and regulatory requirements?