AICM AtlasCSA AI Controls Matrix
IAM · Identity & Access Management
IAM-18AI-Specific

Output Modification and Special Authorization

Specification

When allowing model output modification of AI generated output, establish a role for this access and allow changes only by authorized identities.

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

Resource provisioning, Data collection

Development

Supply Chain, Design

Evaluation

Evaluation, Validation/Red Teaming

Deployment

Orchestration, AI Services supply chain, AI applications

Delivery

Operations, Maintenance

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

Owned by the Orchestrated Service Provider (OSP)

The Orchestrated Service Provider (OSP) 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 OSP 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 OSP is responsible for enabling the customer and/or upstream partner in the implementation/configuration of the control within their risk management approach. The OSP is accountable for ensuring that its providers upstream (e.g MPs) implement the control as it relates to the service/product the develop and offered by the OSP. This refers to entities that create the technical building blocks and management tools that enable AI implementation. This can include platforms, frameworks, and tools that facilitate the integration, deployment, and management of AI models within enterprise workflows. These providers focus on model orchestration and offer services like API access, automated scaling, prompt management, workflow automation, monitoring, and governance rather than end-user functionality or raw infrastructure. They help businesses implement AI in a structured and efficient manner. Examples: AWS, Azure, GCP, OpenAI, Anthropic, LangChain (for AI workflow orchestration), Anyscale (Ray for distributed AI workloads), Databricks (MLflow), IBM Watson Orchestrate, and developer platforms like Google AI Studio.

Application

Shared Application Provider-AI Customer (Shared AP-AIC)

The AP and AIC both share responsibility and accountability 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 offer and consume.

Implementation guidelines

[All Actors]
1. Implement the procedures and workflow for modification of AI generated output, including approvals form 
authorized parties.

2. Define based of organization policy and agreements, which roles are allowed to authorization the 
modification of AI generated output.

3. Ensure all modification of AI generate output are logged and reviewed on a regular basis.
 
4. Implement SoD to ensure that individuals modifying AI output are separate for the individuals 
authorizing and the individuals reviewing changes.

[MP/OSP/AP]
1. Ensure that details regarding the modification of AI generated output and the circumstances in which it occurs are shared with AIC through policy and agreements.

2. Clearly label and notify users when the output has been modified, and when appropriate detail what the 
change is.

Auditing guidelines

1. Ensure CSP-managed AI platforms restrict post-inference output modifications to administrative roles.

2. Verify role-specific logging of any changes to AI inference result storage or redirection.

3. Confirm support for output hashing or versioning mechanisms as part of audit requirements.

4. Validate CSP’s change control procedures cover model endpoint outputs used in production pipelines.

5. Check if customers are provided with mechanisms to lock output fields or enforce immutability where necessary.

Standards mappings

ISO 42001No Gap
42001:  A.3.2 / B.3.2
42001:  A.2.4 / B.2.4
27001: A.5.18
27001: A.8.3
27001: A.8.32
Addendum

N/A

EU AI ActPartial Gap
Article 9
Article 14
Article 15
Article 16
Article 17
Annex IV
Addendum

The AICM IAM-18 control is partially covered in the EU AI Act through general security and risk management principles but lacks explicit requirements for privileged access management.

NIST AI 600-1Full Gap
No Mapping
Addendum

No (explicit/implicit) reference to the requirement set by the AICM control is made in the NIST AI 600-1 standard.

BSI AIC4No Gap
C4 DM-02
C4 RE-02
Addendum

N/A

AI-CAIQ questions (1)

IAM-18.1

Are role for access when allowing model output modification of AI-generated output established to ensure changes are made only by authorized identities?