Controlled Physical Access Points
Specification
Design and implement physical security perimeters to safeguard personnel, data, and information systems.
Threat coverage
Architectural relevance
Lifecycle
Data storage
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Operations
Not applicable
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
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.
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
Auditing guidelines
1. Examine the policy relating to physical security perimeters. 2. Examine the lists of types of areas in the organization, and the classification of each. 3. Determine if there are appropriate physical security barriers and if monitoring exists between areas.
Standards mappings
42001: A.2.3 Alignment with other organizational policies 42001: A.4.2 Resource Documentation 27001: A.7.1 - Physical security perimeters 27001: A.7.2 Physical entry 27001: A.7.1 Securing offices rooms and facilities 27001: A.7.4 Physical security monitoring 27002: 7.1 - Physical security perimeters 27002: 7.2 Physical entry 27002: 7.3 Securing offices rooms and facilities 27002: 7.4 Physical security monitoring
Addendum
N/A
No Mapping
Addendum
Ensure that all locations where high-risk AI systems, their supporting infrastructure, and sensitive data are housed are protected by controlled physical access points. Restrict access to authorized personnel only. List physical threats and access controls as factors to consider when identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks to the AI system.
No Mapping
Addendum
There are no NIST AI 600-1 compliance action items that address physical security or establishing physical security perimeters around business areas.
PS-03
Addendum
N/A
AI-CAIQ questions (1)
Are physical security perimeters designed and implemented to safeguard personnel, data, and information systems?