+Член 7 Изменения на приложение III
---+Член 7 1.
---+Член 7 2.
---+Член 7 3.
|
Член 7 Изменения на приложение III
-
1. Преглед
| Наименование |
Регулация |
|
Член 7 1.
|
На Комисията се предоставя правомощието да приема делегирани актове в съответствие с член 97 за изменение на приложение III чрез добавяне на нови или изменение на случаите на употреба на високорискови системи с ИИ, когато са изпълнени следните две условия:
a)
системите с ИИ са предназначени за използване в някоя от областите, посочени в приложение III;
б)
системите с ИИ пораждат риск от увреждане на здравето и безопасността или риск от неблагоприятно въздействие върху основните права и този риск е равностоен или по-голям от риска от увреждане или неблагоприятно въздействие, породен от високорисковите системи с ИИ, които вече са посочени в приложение III.
|
|
Член 7 2.
|
При оценката във връзка с условието по параграф 1, буква б), Комисията взема предвид следните критерии:
a)
предназначението на системата с ИИ;
б)
степента, в която дадена система с ИИ е била използвана или е вероятно да бъде използвана;
в)
естеството и количеството на данните, обработвани и използвани от системата с ИИ, и по-специално дали се обработват специални категории лични данни;
г)
степента, в която системата с ИИ действа автономно, и възможността човек да отхвърли решение или препоръки, които могат да доведат до евентуална вреда;
д)
степента, в която използването на система с ИИ вече е причинило увреждане на здравето и безопасността или е оказало неблагоприятно въздействие върху основните права, или е породило значителни опасения във връзка с вероятността от такова увреждане или неблагоприятно въздействие, като за това свидетелстват например доклади или документирани твърдения, представени на националните компетентни органи, или други доклади, когато е приложимо;
е)
потенциалната степен на такова увреждане или неблагоприятно въздействие, по-специално по отношение на неговия интензитет и способността му да засегне множество лица или да засегне несъразмерно конкретна група лица;
ж)
степента, в която лицата, които може да бъдат засегнати от увреждане или неблагоприятно въздействие, зависят от резултата, получен от дадена система с ИИ, по-специално тъй като поради практически или правни причини не е възможно в разумна степен да не използват този резултат;
з)
степента, в която съществува властово неравновесие или в която лицата, които може да бъдат засегнати от увреждане или неблагоприятно въздействие, се намират в уязвимо положение по отношение на внедрителя на система с ИИ, по-специално поради статус, авторитет, познания, икономическо или социално положение или възраст;
и)
степента, в която резултатът, получен с използването на система с ИИ, е лесно поправим или обратим, предвид наличните технически решения за неговата поправка или отхвърляне, при които резултатите, оказващи неблагоприятно въздействие върху здравето, безопасността или основните права, не се считат за лесно поправими или обратими;
й)
мащаба и вероятната полза от внедряването на системата с ИИ за отделни лица, групи или обществото като цяло, включително възможни подобрения на безопасността на продуктите;
к)
степента, в която в действащото право на Съюза са предвидени:
i)
ефективни мерки за правна защита във връзка с рисковете, произтичащи от дадена система с ИИ, с изключение на искове за обезщетение;
ii)
ефективни мерки за предотвратяване или значително намаляване на тези рискове.
|
|
Член 7 3.
|
На Комисията се предоставя правомощието да приема делегирани актове в съответствие с член 97 за изменение на списъка в приложение III чрез заличаване на високорискови системи с ИИ, когато са изпълнени следните две условия:
a)
съответната високорискова система с ИИ или системи с ИИ вече не поражда(т) значителен риск за основните права, здравето или безопасността предвид критериите, изброени в параграф 2;
б)
заличаването не намалява общото равнище на защитата на здравето, безопасността и основните права съгласно правото на Съюза.
|
,
1.1 Препратки
1.2 Идентифицирани изисквания
1.3 Свързани стандарти
2. Идентифицирани изисквания
Изисквания
| Източник |
Изискване |
3. Свързани стандарти
Стандарти
| Източник |
Изискване |
|
SCF
|
High-Risk Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) Categorization
Description
Mechanisms exist to categorize Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) as "High Risk" if it poses a significant risk of harm to an individual's: (1) Health; (2) Safety; and/or (3) Fundamental human rights.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Identify systems that could harm people if misused (e.g., safety devices, sensitive personal data)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ High-risk categorization field in asset inventory ∙ Criteria for high-risk classification
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ High-risk TAAS categorization in CMDB based on potential harm to individuals or society ∙ Enhanced controls for high-risk assets
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Formal high-risk categorization criteria (e.g., aligned with EU AI Act, safety impact) ∙ Risk-based control baselines for high-risk TAAS
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise high-risk asset categorization program integrated with risk management and regulatory obligations ∙ Enhanced assurance for high-risk TAAS
SCR-CMM
Level 0 Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Asset Management (AST) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AST domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Asset management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ The IT department establishes, maintains and updates an inventory that contains a listing of all organizational-owned TAASD, at a minimum covering common devices (e.g., laptops, workstations and servers).
Level 3 Well Defined
Asset Management (AST) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An IT Asset Management (ITAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AST domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of ITAM operations (e.g., ITAM platform, (e.g., Configuration Management Database (CMBD) Asset Management solution). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AST domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to categorize a system and/or service as "High Risk" if it poses a significant risk of harm to an individual's: (1) Health; (2) Safety; and/or (3) Fundamental human rights.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
|
|
SCF
|
High-Risk Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) Categorization
Description
Mechanisms exist to categorize Technology Assets, Applications and/or Services (TAAS) as "High Risk" if it poses a significant risk of harm to an individual's: (1) Health; (2) Safety; and/or (3) Fundamental human rights.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Identify systems that could harm people if misused (e.g., safety devices, sensitive personal data)
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ High-risk categorization field in asset inventory ∙ Criteria for high-risk classification
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ High-risk TAAS categorization in CMDB based on potential harm to individuals or society ∙ Enhanced controls for high-risk assets
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ Formal high-risk categorization criteria (e.g., aligned with EU AI Act, safety impact) ∙ Risk-based control baselines for high-risk TAAS
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise high-risk asset categorization program integrated with risk management and regulatory obligations ∙ Enhanced assurance for high-risk TAAS
SCR-CMM
Level 0 Not Performed
Practices are non-existent, based on the inability to demonstrate an implemented and operational capability. A reasonable person would conclude the control is not being performed.
Level 1 Performed Informally
SCR-CMM Level 1 criteria definitions are not available for this control: ▪ A reasonable person would conclude this control requires a structured process. ▪ At this level of maturity, the "ad hoc" nature of performing a capability informally would indicate the intent of the control is not met due to a lack of consistency and formality.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Asset Management (AST) capabilities are requirements-driven, but are not standardized across the entity (e.g., local/regional level consistency). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST domain capabilities are documented and maintained by process owners. ▪ IT and/or cybersecurity personnel work with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AST domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Asset management-related controls are primarily administrative and preventative in nature (e.g., policies, standards and procedures & guidelines). ▪ Asset management may be a defined function (e.g., team or department) or assigned as an additional duty to existing IT and/or cybersecurity personnel. ▪ The IT department establishes, maintains and updates an inventory that contains a listing of all organizational-owned TAASD, at a minimum covering common devices (e.g., laptops, workstations and servers).
Level 3 Well Defined
Asset Management (AST) capabilities are standardized across the entity for applicability to People, Processes, Technologies, Data and/or Facilities (PPTDF) to ensure consistency for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). Capability criteria associated with this control reasonably expect the following criteria to exist: ▪ Policies and standards associated with AST domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AST domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An IT Asset Management (ITAM) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AST domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of ITAM operations (e.g., ITAM platform, (e.g., Configuration Management Database (CMBD) Asset Management solution). ▪ The entity's Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team, or similar function, works with business stakeholders and process owners to appropriately scope and reasonably implement cybersecurity and data protection controls associated with AST domain capabilities to address Minimum Compliance Requirements (MCR) (e.g., applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements) and Discretionary Security Requirements (DSR) (e.g., entity-required controls). ▪ An implemented and operational capability exists to categorize a system and/or service as "High Risk" if it poses a significant risk of harm to an individual's: (1) Health; (2) Safety; and/or (3) Fundamental human rights.
Level 4 Quantitatively Controlled
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ While it may be possible to develop “metrics-driven” capabilities for this control, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
Level 5 Continuously Improving
Utilize SCR-CMM Level 3 or Level 4 (if available) criteria definitions: ▪ There are no defined Level 5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to operationalize this control. ▪ Level 5 capabilities should be considered “world-class” where the control builds on Level 4 capabilities, but are continuously improving through Artificial Intelligence (AI) and/or Machine Learning (ML) technologies. ▪ While it may be possible to develop responsive capabilities for this control through the use of AI and/or ML technologies, the criteria would be organization-specific to define.
|
|