Automatic Lock Screen
Specification
Configure all relevant interactive-use endpoints to require an automatic lock screen.
Threat coverage
Architectural relevance
Lifecycle
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Not applicable
Ownership / SSRM
PI
Shared across the supply chain
Shared control ownership refers to responsibilities and activities related to LLM security that are distributed across multiple stakeholders within the AI supply chain, including the Cloud Service Provider (CSP), Model Provider (MP), Orchestrated Service Provider (OSP), Application Provider (AP), and Customer (AIC). These controls require coordinated actions, communication, and governance across all involved parties to ensure their effectiveness.
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. Verify that the CSP enforces automatic lock screen settings to activate after a specified inactivity period, requiring reauthentication. 2. Confirm that inactivity timeout settings are consistently applied to all managed endpoints and aligned with security risk assessments. 3. Inspect whether authentication methods include strong passwords, biometrics, or passwordless mechanisms such as PINs or fingerprint recognition for unlocking endpoints. 4. Review implementation evidence such as endpoint configuration baselines, centralized policy enforcement logs, and compliance reports. 5. Ensure the lock screen settings are incorporated into broader endpoint management policies and cannot be bypassed by users. From CCM: 1. Determine the organization's definition of interactive-use endpoints. 2. Examine the processes and technical measures in place to enforce automatic lock screens.
Standards mappings
No Mapping for ISO 42001 ISO 27001 - A.8.1
Addendum
No ISO 42001 controls support UEM-06 topic of lock screen on endpoint devices
No Mapping
Addendum
Configure all relevant interactive-use endpoints to require an automatic lock screen.
No Mapping
Addendum
No NIST AI 600-1 control supports the UEM-06 topic of a lock screen on endpoint devices. It is missing reference on any device-level security configurations, Session lock and timeout mechanisms, Infrastructure or OS-level enforcement controls, Mapping to interactive user endpoint policies.
C4 SR-06 C5 AM-05
Addendum
N/A
AI-CAIQ questions (1)
Are all relevant interactive-use endpoints configured to require an automatic lock screen?