+Artykuł 50 Obowiązki w zakresie przejrzystości dla dostawców i podmiotów stosujących niektóre systemy AI
---+Artykuł 50 1.
---+Artykuł 50 2.
---+Artykuł 50 3.
---+Artykuł 50 4.
---+Artykuł 50 5.
---+Artykuł 50 6.
---+Artykuł 50 7.
|
Artykuł 50 Obowiązki w zakresie przejrzystości dla dostawców i podmiotów stosujących niektóre systemy AI
-
1. Przegląd
| Tytuł |
Regulacja |
|
Artykuł 50 1.
|
Dostawcy zapewniają, aby systemy AI przeznaczone do wchodzenia w bezpośrednią interakcję z osobami fizycznymi projektowano i rozwijano w taki sposób, aby zainteresowane osoby fizyczne były informowane o tym, że prowadzą interakcję z systemem AI, chyba że jest to oczywiste z punktu widzenia osoby fizycznej, która jest dostatecznie poinformowana, uważna i ostrożna, z uwzględnieniem okoliczności i kontekstu wykorzystywania. Obowiązek ten nie ma zastosowania do systemów AI, których wykorzystywanie jest dozwolone na mocy prawa do celów wykrywania przestępstw, przeciwdziałania im, prowadzenia postępowań przygotowawczych w ich sprawie lub ścigania ich sprawców, z zastrzeżeniem odpowiednich zabezpieczeń w zakresie praw i wolności osób trzecich, chyba że systemy te udostępnia się ogółowi społeczeństwa na potrzeby składania zawiadomień o popełnieniu przestępstwa.
|
|
Artykuł 50 2.
|
Dostawcy systemów AI, w tym systemów AI ogólnego zastosowania, generujących treści w postaci syntetycznych dźwięków, obrazów, wideo lub tekstu, zapewniają, aby wyniki systemu AI zostały oznakowane w formacie nadającym się do odczytu maszynowego i były wykrywalne jako sztucznie wygenerowane lub zmanipulowane. Dostawcy zapewniają skuteczność, interoperacyjność, solidność i niezawodność swoich rozwiązań technicznych w zakresie, w jakim jest to technicznie wykonalne, uwzględniając przy tym specyfikę i ograniczenia różnych rodzajów treści, koszty wdrażania oraz powszechnie uznany stan wiedzy technicznej, co może być odzwierciedlone w odpowiednich normach technicznych. Obowiązek ten nie ma zastosowania w zakresie, w jakim systemy AI pełnią funkcję wspomagającą w zakresie standardowej edycji lub nie zmieniają w istotny sposób przekazywanych przez podmiot stosujący danych wejściowych lub ich semantyki, ani w zakresie, w jakim jest to dozwolone na mocy prawa do celów wykrywania przestępstw, zapobiegania im, prowadzenia postępowań przygotowawczych w ich sprawie lub ścigania ich sprawców.
|
|
Artykuł 50 3.
|
Podmioty stosujące systemy rozpoznawania emocji lub systemy kategoryzacji biometrycznej informują osoby fizyczne, wobec których systemy te są stosowane, o fakcie ich stosowania i przetwarzają dane osobowe stosownie do przypadku zgodnie z rozporządzeniami (UE) 2016/679 i (UE) 2018/1725 oraz dyrektywą (UE) 2016/680. Obowiązek ten nie ma zastosowania do systemów AI wykorzystywanych do kategoryzacji biometrycznej i rozpoznawania emocji, których wykorzystywanie jest dozwolone z mocy prawa do celów wykrywania przestępstw, przeciwdziałania im i prowadzenia postępowań przygotowawczych w przestępstwami ich sprawach, z zastrzeżeniem odpowiednich zabezpieczeń w zakresie praw i wolności osób trzecich oraz zgodnie z prawem Unii.
|
|
Artykuł 50 4.
|
Podmioty stosujące system AI, który generuje obrazy, treści audio lub wideo stanowiące treści deepfake lub który manipuluje takimi obrazami lub treściami, ujawniają, że treści te zostały sztucznie wygenerowane lub zmanipulowane. Obowiązek ten nie ma zastosowania, w przypadku gdy wykorzystywanie jest dozwolone na mocy prawa w celu wykrywania przestępstw, zapobiegania im, prowadzenia postępowań przygotowawczych w ich sprawie lub ścigania ich sprawców. W przypadku gdy treść stanowi część pracy lub programu o wyraźnie artystycznym, twórczym, satyrycznym, fikcyjnym lub analogicznym charakterze obowiązki w zakresie przejrzystości określone w niniejszym ustępie ograniczają się do ujawnienia istnienia takich wygenerowanych lub zmanipulowanych treści w odpowiedni sposób, który nie utrudnia wyświetlania lub korzystania z utworu. Podmioty stosujące system AI, który generuje tekst publikowany w celu informowania społeczeństwa o sprawach leżących w interesie publicznym lub manipuluje takim tekstem, ujawniają, że tekst został sztucznie wygenerowany lub zmanipulowany. Obowiązek ten nie ma zastosowania, w przypadku gdy wykorzystywanie jest dozwolone na mocy prawa w celu wykrywania przestępstw, zapobiegania im, prowadzenia postępowań przygotowawczych w ich sprawie lub ścigania ich sprawców lub w przypadku gdy treści wygenerowane przez AI zostały poddane weryfikacji przez człowieka lub kontroli redakcyjnej i gdy za publikację treści odpowiedzialność redakcyjną ponosi osoba fizyczna lub prawna.
|
|
Artykuł 50 5.
|
Informacje, o których mowa w ust. 1–4, są przekazywane zainteresowanym osobom fizycznym w jasny i wyraźny sposób, najpóźniej w momencie pierwszej interakcji lub pierwszego stosowania. Informacje te muszą spełniać mające zastosowanie wymogi dostępności.
|
|
Artykuł 50 6.
|
Ust. 1–4 nie mają wpływu na wymogi i obowiązki ustanowione w rozdziale III i pozostają bez uszczerbku dla innych obowiązków w zakresie przejrzystości ustanowionych w prawie Unii lub prawie krajowym w odniesieniu do podmiotów stosujących systemy AI.
|
|
Artykuł 50 7.
|
Komisja zachęca do opracowywania kodeksów praktyk na poziomie Unii i wspiera ich opracowanie, aby ułatwić skuteczne wykonywanie obowiązków w zakresie wykrywania, oznaczania i etykietowania treści sztucznie wygenerowanych lub zmanipulowanych. Komisja, uwzględniając w możliwie największym stopniu opinię Rady ds. AI, ocenia, czy przestrzeganie tych kodeksów praktyk jest wystarczające do zapewnienia zgodności z obowiązkami określonymi w ust. 2 i 4 niniejszego artykułu, zgodnie z procedurą określoną w art. 56 ust. 6. Jeżeli Komisja uzna, że kodeks praktyk nie jest odpowiedni, może przyjąć akt wykonawczy określający wspólne zasady wykonywania tych obowiązków zgodnie z procedurą sprawdzającą ustanowioną w art. 98 ust. 2.
|
,
1.1 Odwołania
1.2 Zidentyfikowane wymagania
1.3 Powiązane normy
2. Zidentyfikowane wymagania
Wymagania
| Źródło |
Wymaganie |
3. Powiązane normy
Normy
| Źródło |
Wymaganie |
|
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.
|
|