Model Artifact Scanning
Specification
Define, implement, and evaluate policies, procedures, and technical measures for the scanning of model artifacts for vulnerabilities and attacks, at each step of the service lifecycle and at each hand over point. Regularly review and update policies, procedures and technical measures to address model artifact scanning.
Threat coverage
Architectural relevance
Lifecycle
Team and expertise
Design, Training, Supply Chain
Evaluation, Validation/Red Teaming, Re-evaluation
AI Services supply chain, AI applications
Operations, Maintenance
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. Examine security measures in place for storing model artifacts, including access controls and encryption. 2. Verify logging and monitoring of access to model artifacts. 3. Evaluate measures to prevent unauthorized modification or deletion of model artifacts. 4. Assess compliance with relevant data security standards and regulations. 5. Check procedures for secure transfer of model artifacts. 6. Verify backup and recovery procedures for model artifacts.
Standards mappings
No Mapping for ISO 42001 27002 - 8.8 Management of technical vulnerabilities
Addendum
No ISO 42001 covers the topics of MDS-02, however ISO 27002 does support with 8.8 Management of technical vulnerabilities
Article 15 (5)
Addendum
N/A
MP-2.3-005
Addendum
This NIST AI 600-1 control does not mention the MDS-02 topic of "at each step of the service lifecycle and at each hand over point."
C4 PC-01 C4 SR-05 C5 OPS-18 C5 SP-01 C5 SP-02
Addendum
N/A
AI-CAIQ questions (2)
Are processes, procedures, and technical measures defined, implemented, and evaluated for the periodic scanning of model artifacts for vulnerabilities and attacks at each step of the service lifecycle and at each handover point?
Are policies, procedures and technical measures to address model artifact scanning regularly reviewed and updated?