Log Records
Specification
Generate audit records containing relevant security information.
Threat coverage
Architectural relevance
Lifecycle
Data storage
Training, Guardrails
Evaluation, Validation/Red Teaming, Re-evaluation
Orchestration, AI Services supply chain, AI applications
Operations, Maintenance, Continuous monitoring, Continuous improvement
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
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 42001 A.6.2.6 ISO 27001 A.8.16
Addendum
N/A
Article 12 (2)
Addendum
N/A
MP-2.3-003
Addendum
Generating audit records.
C4 RE-02 C5 OPS-15
Addendum
N/A
AI-CAIQ questions (1)
Are audit records generated, and do they contain relevant security information?