AICM AtlasCSA AI Controls Matrix
LOG · Logging and Monitoring
LOG-08Cloud & AI Related

Log Records

Specification

Generate audit records containing relevant security information.

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

Training, Guardrails

Evaluation

Evaluation, Validation/Red Teaming, Re-evaluation

Deployment

Orchestration, AI Services supply chain, AI applications

Delivery

Operations, Maintenance, Continuous monitoring, Continuous improvement

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

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. Comprehensive AI Lifecycle Logging: Log key events from data ingestion and preprocessing through model training, validation, and inference. Capture relevant metadata (e.g., model versions, data sources, hyperparameters) and link operations to specific users or system events. Include performance metrics (accuracy, loss, latency) and model health indicators (drift detection, anomalies).

2. Automated Monitoring and Incident Management: Deploy real-time analysis and alerting on AI-related logs to detect unusual patterns (e.g., abnormal inference requests, unauthorized model changes). Define incident response procedures for escalations, involving both internal teams and external service providers as necessary.

3. Secure Log Handling and Retention: Encrypt log data at rest and in transit, applying integrity checks to prevent tampering. Use role-based access controls for log review and analysis, and define retention periods that satisfy policy and regulatory requirements.

4. Regular Configuration Reviews: Periodically update logging schemas, retention rules, and alert thresholds to address new AI features, data types, or compliance mandates. Involve stakeholders (security, compliance, engineering) in these reviews to ensure comprehensive coverage.

Auditing guidelines

1. Inquiring with Control Owners

1.1 Conduct interviews with personnel responsible for generating audit records containing relevant cloud infrastructure security information to understand their processes for capturing, formatting, and maintaining security-related audit data across AI processing resources and customer workload environments. Verify their understanding of what constitutes relevant infrastructure security information and their procedures for ensuring audit records contain sufficient detail for infrastructure security investigations, customer isolation validation, and service availability requirements.

2. Inspecting Records and Documents

2.1 Verify cloud infrastructure logs capture event type, timestamp, actor, and source for all compute resource operations, customer workload activities, and infrastructure management events.

2.2 Confirm logs include identifiers for correlating infrastructure actions across compute clusters, storage systems, and customer tenant environments.

2.3 Ensure structured formats (e.g., JSON, syslog) are used for consistency across cloud infrastructure logging systems.

2.4 Check completeness of cloud infrastructure log records by sampling resource allocation trails, customer workload execution patterns, and infrastructure operation flows.

2.5 Validate that custom infrastructure events are logged where relevant (e.g., hypervisor escape attempts, customer isolation violations, resource exhaustion attacks).

2.6 Review cloud infrastructure audit logs for evidence of tampering or missing entries related to customer workloads and infrastructure operations.

2.7 Examine cloud infrastructure audit records to ensure they contain relevant security information such as resource access controls, customer workload isolation events, infrastructure configuration changes, and security boundary violations.

2.8 Validate that cloud infrastructure audit records include sufficient contextual information to support infrastructure security investigations, customer isolation verification, and service availability analysis.

2.9 Confirm that cloud infrastructure audit record generation covers all security-relevant events across compute resources, storage systems, network infrastructure, and customer tenant isolation mechanisms.

2.10 Review cloud infrastructure audit record retention and storage mechanisms to ensure infrastructure security information remains available for customer SLA compliance and regulatory requirement timeframes.

2.11 Verify cloud-native services generate logs with required fields (e.g., resource, action, user).

2.12 Confirm records support compliance with regional and industry regulations.

2.13 Validate timestamps, source IPs, and user identifiers are present in each log record.

2.14 Review consistency across services (e.g., IAM, VMs, storage).

2.15 Check integrity of audit trails by comparing against service-level events.

2.16 Confirm that all log-generating services follow centralized schema.

Standards mappings

ISO 42001No Gap
ISO 42001 A.6.2.6
ISO 27001 A.8.16
Addendum

N/A

EU AI ActNo Gap
Article 12 (2)
Addendum

N/A

NIST AI 600-1Partial Gap
MP-2.3-003
Addendum

Generating audit records.

BSI AIC4No Gap
C4 RE-02
C5 OPS-15
Addendum

N/A

AI-CAIQ questions (1)

LOG-08.1

Are audit records generated, and do they contain relevant security information?