+Article 50 Obligations de transparence pour les fournisseurs et les déployeurs de certains systèmes d’IA
---+Article 50 1.
---+Article 50 2.
---+Article 50 3.
---+Article 50 4.
---+Article 50 5.
---+Article 50 6.
---+Article 50 7.
|
Article 50 Obligations de transparence pour les fournisseurs et les déployeurs de certains systèmes d’IA
-
1. Vue d’ensemble
| Intitulé |
Réglementation |
|
Article 50 1.
|
Les fournisseurs veillent à ce que les systèmes d’IA destinés à interagir directement avec des personnes physiques soient conçus et développés de manière que les personnes physiques concernées soient informées qu’elles interagissent avec un système d’IA, sauf si cela ressort clairement du point de vue d’une personne physique normalement informée et raisonnablement attentive et avisée, compte tenu des circonstances et du contexte d’utilisation. Cette obligation ne s’applique pas aux systèmes d’IA dont la loi autorise l’utilisation à des fins de prévention ou de détection des infractions pénales, d’enquêtes ou de poursuites en la matière, sous réserve de garanties appropriées pour les droits et libertés des tiers, sauf si ces systèmes sont mis à la disposition du public pour permettre le signalement d’une infraction pénale.
|
|
Article 50 2.
|
Les fournisseurs de systèmes d’IA, y compris de systèmes d’IA à usage général, qui génèrent des contenus de synthèse de type audio, image, vidéo ou texte, veillent à ce que les sorties des systèmes d’IA soient marquées dans un format lisible par machine et identifiables comme ayant été générées ou manipulées par une IA. Les fournisseurs veillent à ce que leurs solutions techniques soient aussi efficaces, interopérables, solides et fiables que la technologie le permet, compte tenu des spécificités et des limites des différents types de contenus, des coûts de mise en œuvre et de l’état de la technique généralement reconnu, comme cela peut ressortir des normes techniques pertinentes. Cette obligation ne s’applique pas dans la mesure où les systèmes d’IA remplissent une fonction d’assistance pour la mise en forme standard ou ne modifient pas de manière substantielle les données d’entrée fournies par le déployeur ou leur sémantique, ou lorsque leur utilisation est autorisée par la loi à des fins de prévention ou de détection des infractions pénales, d’enquêtes ou de poursuites en la matière.
|
|
Article 50 3.
|
Les déployeurs d’un système de reconnaissance des émotions ou d’un système de catégorisation biométrique informent les personnes physiques qui y sont exposées du fonctionnement du système et traitent les données à caractère personnel conformément au règlement (UE) 2016/679, au règlement (UE) 2018/1725 et à la directive (UE) 2016/680, selon le cas. Cette obligation ne s’applique pas aux systèmes d’IA utilisés pour la catégorisation biométrique et la reconnaissance des émotions dont la loi autorise l’utilisation à des fins de prévention ou de détection des infractions pénales ou d’enquêtes en la matière, sous réserve de garanties appropriées pour les droits et libertés des tiers et conformément au droit de l’Union.
|
|
Article 50 4.
|
Les déployeurs d’un système d’IA qui génère ou manipule des images ou des contenus audio ou vidéo constituant un hypertrucage indiquent que les contenus ont été générés ou manipulés par une IA. Cette obligation ne s’applique pas lorsque l’utilisation est autorisée par la loi à des fins de prévention ou de détection des infractions pénales, d’enquêtes ou de poursuites en la matière. Lorsque le contenu fait partie d’une œuvre ou d’un programme manifestement artistique, créatif, satirique, fictif ou analogue, les obligations de transparence énoncées au présent paragraphe se limitent à la divulgation de l’existence de tels contenus générés ou manipulés d’une manière appropriée qui n’entrave pas l’affichage ou la jouissance de l’œuvre. Les déployeurs d’un système d’IA qui génère ou manipule des textes publiés dans le but d’informer le public sur des questions d’intérêt public indiquent que le texte a été généré ou manipulé par une IA. Cette obligation ne s’applique pas lorsque l’utilisation est autorisée par la loi à des fins de prévention ou de détection des infractions pénales, d’enquêtes ou de poursuites en la matière, ou lorsque le contenu généré par l’IA a fait l’objet d’un processus d’examen humain ou de contrôle éditorial et lorsqu’une personne physique ou morale assume la responsabilité éditoriale de la publication du contenu.
|
|
Article 50 5.
|
Les informations visées aux paragraphes 1 à 4 sont fournies aux personnes physiques concernées de manière claire et reconnaissable au plus tard au moment de la première interaction ou de la première exposition. Les informations sont conformes aux exigences applicables en matière d’accessibilité.
|
|
Article 50 6.
|
Les paragraphes 1 à 4 n’ont pas d’incidence sur les exigences et obligations énoncées au chapitre III et sont sans préjudice des autres obligations de transparence prévues par le droit de l’Union ou le droit national pour les déployeurs de systèmes d’IA.
|
|
Article 50 7.
|
La Commission encourage et facilite l'élaboration de codes de bonne pratique au niveau de l'Union afin de faciliter la mise en œuvre effective des obligations relatives à la détection, au marquage et à l'étiquetage des contenus générés ou manipulés par une IA. La Commission, tenant dûment compte de l'avis du Comité IA, vérifie si l'application de ces codes de bonne pratique est suffisante pour garantir le respect des obligations énoncées aux paragraphes 2 et 4 du présent article, conformément à la procédure établie à l'article 56, paragraphe 6. Si elle estime que le code de bonne pratique n'est pas approprié, la Commission peut adopter un acte d'exécution précisant des règles communes pour la mise en œuvre de ces obligations conformément à la procédure d'examen prévue à l'article 98, paragraphe 2.
|
,
1.1 Références
1.2 Exigences identifiées
1.3 Normes associées
2. Exigences identifiées
Exigences
| Source |
Exigence |
3. Normes associées
Normes
| Source |
Exigence |
|
SCF
|
AI & Autonomous Technologies Output Marking
Description
Mechanisms exist to mark output from Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) in a machine-readable format so it is detectable as artificially generated or manipulated.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Label AI-generated content when distributing it
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ Policy requiring labeling of AI-generated content
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Formal AI content marking policy ∙ Machine-readable metadata for AI content
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ AI content marking program ∙ Technical implementation of C2PA or similar standards
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise AI content marking framework ∙ C2PA standard implementation ∙ Automated content marking in AI pipelines
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
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with AAT domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ AAT-related processes are expected to follow the organization's existing processes (e.g., incident response, asset management, change control and risk assessments). ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide AAT oversight, where the Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, governs technology decisions what is acceptable for AAT within the organization.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Artificial Intelligence (AI)-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.
Level 3 Well Defined
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An Artificial Intelligence Governance (AIG) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AAT domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of AI governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., dedicated AI governance platform). ▪ 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 AAT 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 mark output from AAT in a machine-readable format so it is detectable as artificially generated or manipulated.
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
|
AI & Autonomous Technologies Use Notification To Users
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that make decisions, or assist in making decisions, inform the people in a clear manner that they are: (1) Utilizing an AAT solution; and (2) Expected to validate the output for relevance and accuracy.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Inform users when AI is making or assisting decisions affecting them
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ User notification policy for AI-assisted decisions
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Formal user notification policy and procedures for AI decision support
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ AI user transparency program ∙ Automated user notifications for AI decisions
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise AI user transparency framework ∙ Automated disclosure mechanisms ∙ Regulatory compliance (EU AI Act, GDPR)
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
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with AAT domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ AAT-related processes are expected to follow the organization's existing processes (e.g., incident response, asset management, change control and risk assessments). ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide AAT oversight, where the Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, governs technology decisions what is acceptable for AAT within the organization.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Artificial Intelligence (AI)-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.
Level 3 Well Defined
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An Artificial Intelligence Governance (AIG) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AAT domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of AI governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., dedicated AI governance platform). ▪ 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 AAT 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 ensure AAT that make decisions, or assist in making decisions, inform the people in a clear manner that they are: (1) Utilizing an AAT solution; and (2) Expected to validate the output for relevance and accuracy.
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
|
AI & Autonomous Technologies Use Notification To Users
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that make decisions, or assist in making decisions, inform the people in a clear manner that they are: (1) Utilizing an AAT solution; and (2) Expected to validate the output for relevance and accuracy.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Inform users when AI is making or assisting decisions affecting them
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ User notification policy for AI-assisted decisions
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Formal user notification policy and procedures for AI decision support
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ AI user transparency program ∙ Automated user notifications for AI decisions
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise AI user transparency framework ∙ Automated disclosure mechanisms ∙ Regulatory compliance (EU AI Act, GDPR)
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
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with AAT domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ AAT-related processes are expected to follow the organization's existing processes (e.g., incident response, asset management, change control and risk assessments). ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide AAT oversight, where the Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, governs technology decisions what is acceptable for AAT within the organization.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Artificial Intelligence (AI)-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.
Level 3 Well Defined
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An Artificial Intelligence Governance (AIG) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AAT domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of AI governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., dedicated AI governance platform). ▪ 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 AAT 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 ensure AAT that make decisions, or assist in making decisions, inform the people in a clear manner that they are: (1) Utilizing an AAT solution; and (2) Expected to validate the output for relevance and accuracy.
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
|
AI & Autonomous Technologies Use Notification To Users
Description
Mechanisms exist to ensure Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Autonomous Technologies (AAT) that make decisions, or assist in making decisions, inform the people in a clear manner that they are: (1) Utilizing an AAT solution; and (2) Expected to validate the output for relevance and accuracy.
Possible Solutions & Considerations
Micro-Small Business (<10 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 1-2
∙ Inform users when AI is making or assisting decisions affecting them
Small Business (10-49 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 3-4
∙ User notification policy for AI-assisted decisions
Medium Business (50-249 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 5-6
∙ Formal user notification policy and procedures for AI decision support
Large Business (250-999 staff) / BLS Firm Size Classes 7-8
∙ AI user transparency program ∙ Automated user notifications for AI decisions
Enterprise (> 1,000 staff) / BLS Firm Size Class 9
∙ Enterprise AI user transparency framework ∙ Automated disclosure mechanisms ∙ Regulatory compliance (EU AI Act, GDPR)
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
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) domain capabilities are ad hoc and inconsistent. Capability criteria associated with this control may include: ▪ Policies, standards & procedures associated with AAT domain capabilities provide limited coverage due to the depth and breadth of the existing documentation. ▪ AAT-related processes are expected to follow the organization's existing processes (e.g., incident response, asset management, change control and risk assessments). ▪ No formal Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) team exists to provide AAT oversight, where the Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, governs technology decisions what is acceptable for AAT within the organization.
Level 2 Planned Tracked
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT domain capabilities are formally documented and centrally-managed by the entity. ▪ Standardized Operating Procedures (SOP) associated with AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities to address applicable statutory, regulatory and/or contractual requirements for Technology Assets, Applications, Services and/or Data (TAASD). ▪ Artificial Intelligence (AI)-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.
Level 3 Well Defined
Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Technology (AAT) 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 AAT 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 AAT domain capabilities are well-documented and kept current by process owners. ▪ An Artificial Intelligence Governance (AIG) team, or similar function, is appropriately staffed and supported to implement and maintain AAT domain capabilities. ▪ Technology is leveraged to enhance the efficiency and accuracy of AI governance, risk management and compliance operations (e.g., dedicated AI governance platform). ▪ 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 AAT 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 ensure AAT that make decisions, or assist in making decisions, inform the people in a clear manner that they are: (1) Utilizing an AAT solution; and (2) Expected to validate the output for relevance and accuracy.
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.
|
|