+Článok 7 Zmeny prílohy III
---+Článok 7 1.
---+Článok 7 2.
---+Článok 7 3.

Článok 7 Zmeny prílohy III

-

1. Prehľad

,
Článok 7 1.

Komisia je splnomocnená prijímať delegované akty v súlade s článkom 97 s cieľom zmeniť prílohu III doplnením alebo úpravou prípadov používania vysokorizikových systémov AI, ak sú splnené obe tieto podmienky:

a) 

systémy AI sú určené na používanie v ktorejkoľvek z oblastí uvedených v prílohe III;

b) 

systémy AI predstavujú riziko ujmy na zdraví a bezpečnosti alebo riziko nepriaznivého vplyvu na základné práva a toto riziko je rovnocenné alebo väčšie než riziko poškodenia alebo nepriaznivého vplyvu, ktoré predstavujú vysokorizikové systémy AI už uvedené v prílohe III.
Článok 7 2.

Pri posudzovaní podmienky podľa odseku 1 písm. b) Komisia zohľadní tieto kritériá:

a) 

zamýšľaný účel systému AI;

b) 

rozsah, v akom sa systém AI používa alebo sa pravdepodobne bude používať;

c) 

povahu a množstvo údajov spracúvaných a používaných systémom AI, najmä to, či sa spracúvajú osobitné kategórie osobných údajov;

d) 

rozsah, v akom systém AI koná samostatne, a možnosť človeka zvrátiť rozhodnutia alebo odporúčania, ktoré môžu viesť k potenciálnej ujme;

e) 

rozsah, v akom používanie systému AI už spôsobilo ujmu na zdraví a bezpečnosti alebo nepriaznivý vplyv na základné práva, alebo vyvolalo vážne obavy v súvislosti s pravdepodobnosťou takejto ujmy alebo nepriaznivého vplyvu, čo preukazujú napríklad správy alebo zdokumentované tvrdenia, ktoré sa predložili vnútroštátnym príslušným orgánom, alebo prípadne iné správy;

f) 

potenciálny rozsah takejto ujmu alebo nepriaznivého vplyvu, najmä pokiaľ ide o jeho intenzitu a schopnosť ovplyvniť viacero osôb alebo neúmerne ovplyvniť konkrétnu skupinu osôb;

g) 

rozsah, v akom sú osoby, ktoré potenciálne utrpeli ujmu alebo trpia nepriaznivým vplyvom, závislé od výsledku vytvoreného systémom AI, najmä preto, že z praktických alebo právnych dôvodov nie je primerane možné sa na tomto výsledku nepodieľať;

h) 

rozsah, v akom existuje nerovnováha moci, alebo osoby, ktoré potenciálne utrpeli ujmu alebo trpia nepriaznivým vplyvom, sú vo vzťahu k subjektu nasadzujúcemu systém AI v zraniteľnom postavení, najmä z dôvodu postavenia, autority, znalostí, hospodárskych alebo sociálnych okolností alebo veku;

i) 

rozsah, v akom je výsledok vytvorený pomocou systému AI ľahko napraviteľný alebo zvrátiteľný s prihliadnutím na technické riešenia, ktoré sú k dispozícii na jeho nápravu alebo zvrátenie, pričom výsledky s nepriaznivým vplyvom na zdravie, bezpečnosť alebo základné práva sa nepovažujú za ľahko napraviteľné alebo zvrátiteľné;

j) 

rozsah a pravdepodobnosť prínosu nasadenia systému AI pre jednotlivcov, skupiny alebo spoločnosť ako celok vrátane možných zlepšení bezpečnosti výrobkov;

k) 

rozsah, v akom sa v existujúcom práve Únie stanovujú:

i) 

účinné nápravné opatrenia v súvislosti s rizikami, ktoré systém AI predstavuje, s výnimkou nárokov na náhradu škody;

ii) 

účinné opatrenia na predchádzanie týmto rizikám alebo ich podstatnú minimalizáciu.
Článok 7 3.

Komisia je splnomocnená prijímať delegované akty v súlade s článkom 97 s cieľom zmeniť zoznam v prílohe III vypustením vysokorizikových systémov AI, ak sú splnené obe tieto podmienky:

a) 

dotknutý vysokorizikový systém AI už nepredstavuje významné riziká pre základné práva, zdravie alebo bezpečnosť, pričom sa zohľadňujú kritériá uvedené v odseku 2;

b) 

vypustením sa neznižuje celková úroveň ochrany zdravia, bezpečnosti a základných práv podľa práva Únie.

1.1 Odkazy

1.2 Identifikované požiadavky

1.3 Súvisiace štandardy

2. Identifikované požiadavky

Požiadavky

3. Súvisiace štandardy

Štandardy
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.