+Článok 50 Povinnosti v oblasti transparentnosti pre poskytovateľov a nasadzujúce subjekty určitých systémov AI
---+Článok 50 1.
---+Článok 50 2.
---+Článok 50 3.
---+Článok 50 4.
---+Článok 50 5.
---+Článok 50 6.
---+Článok 50 7.
|
Článok 50 Povinnosti v oblasti transparentnosti pre poskytovateľov a nasadzujúce subjekty určitých systémov AI
-
1. Prehľad
| Názov |
Regulácia |
|
Článok 50 1.
|
Poskytovatelia zabezpečia, aby systémy AI určené na priamu interakciu s fyzickými osobami boli dizajnované a vyvinuté tak, aby boli dotknuté fyzické osoby informované o tom, že interagujú so systémom AI, pokiaľ to nie je zrejmé z hľadiska fyzickej osoby, ktorá je primerane informovaná, pozorná a obozretná, pričom sa prihliada na okolnosti a kontext používania. Táto povinnosť sa nevzťahuje na systémy AI, ktoré sa podľa zákona môžu používať na odhaľovanie, prevenciu, vyšetrovanie alebo stíhanie trestných činov, a to s výhradou primeraných záruk ochrany práv a slobôd tretích strán, pokiaľ tieto systémy nie sú sprístupnené verejnosti na oznamovanie trestných činov.
|
|
Článok 50 2.
|
Poskytovatelia systémov AI vrátane systémov AI na všeobecné účely, ktoré generujú syntetický zvukový, obrazový, video alebo textový obsah, zabezpečia, aby boli výstupy systému AI označené v strojovo čitateľnom formáte a zistiteľné ako umelo vygenerované alebo zmanipulované. Poskytovatelia zabezpečia, aby ich technické riešenia boli účinné, interoperabilné, odolné a spoľahlivé, pokiaľ je to technicky možné, s prihliadnutím na osobitosti a obmedzenia rozličných druhov obsahu, náklady na implementáciu a všeobecne uznávaný aktuálny stav vývoja, ktoré sa môžu odzrkadľovať v príslušných technických normách. Táto povinnosť sa neuplatňuje v rozsahu, v ktorom systémy AI vykonávajú pomocnú funkciu pri štandardných redakčných úpravách alebo pokiaľ podstatne nemenia vstupné údaje poskytnuté nasadzujúcim subjektom alebo ich sémantiku, alebo ak je to zákonom povolené na odhaľovanie, prevenciu, vyšetrovanie alebo stíhanie trestných činov.
|
|
Článok 50 3.
|
Nasadzujúce subjekty systému na rozpoznávanie emócií alebo systému biometrickej kategorizácie informujú o prevádzke systému fyzické osoby, ktoré sú mu vystavené, a spracúvajú osobné údaje v súlade s nariadeniami (EÚ) 2016/679 a (EÚ) 2018/1725 a v relevantnom prípade so smernicou (EÚ) 2016/680. Táto povinnosť sa nevzťahuje na systémy AI používané na biometrickú kategorizáciu a rozpoznávanie emócií, ktoré zákon povoľuje na odhaľovanie, prevenciu, vyšetrovanie alebo stíhanie trestných činov, s výhradou primeraných záruk ochrany práv a slobôd tretích strán a v súlade s právom Únie.
|
|
Článok 50 4.
|
Subjekty nasadzujúce systém AI, ktorý generuje alebo manipuluje obrazový, zvukový alebo video obsah, ktorý predstavuje deep fake, zverejnia, že obsah bol umelo vytvorený alebo manipulovaný. Táto povinnosť sa neuplatňuje, ak je použitie povolené zákonom na odhaľovanie, prevenciu, vyšetrovanie alebo stíhanie trestných činov. Ak je obsah súčasťou zjavne umeleckého, kreatívneho, satirického, fiktívneho alebo analogického diela alebo programu, povinnosti týkajúce sa transparentnosti stanovené v tomto odseku sa obmedzujú na zverejnenie existencie takéhoto vygenerovaného alebo zmanipulovaného obsahu, a to primeraným spôsobom, ktorý nebráni zobrazeniu diela a zážitku z neho. Subjekty nasadzujúce systém AI, ktorý generuje alebo manipuluje text uverejnený s cieľom informovať verejnosť o záležitostiach verejného záujmu, zverejnia, že text bol umelo vygenerovaný alebo manipulovaný. Táto povinnosť sa neuplatňuje, ak je použitie povolené zákonom na odhaľovanie, prevenciu, vyšetrovanie alebo stíhanie trestných činov alebo ak obsah vygenerovaný AI prešiel procesom ľudskej alebo redakčnej kontroly a ak za uverejnenie obsahu nesie redakčnú zodpovednosť fyzická alebo právnická osoba.
|
|
Článok 50 5.
|
Informácie uvedené v odsekoch 1 až 4 sa dotknutým fyzickým osobám poskytnú jasným a rozlíšiteľným spôsobom najneskôr v čase prvej interakcie alebo vystavenia sa systému. Informácie musia byť v súlade s uplatniteľnými požiadavkami na prístupnosť.
|
|
Článok 50 6.
|
Odseky 1 až 4 nemajú vplyv na požiadavky a povinnosti stanovené v kapitole III a nie sú nimi dotknuté iné povinnosti týkajúce sa transparentnosti stanovené pre subjekty nasadzujúce systémy AI v práve Únie alebo vo vnútroštátnom práve.
|
|
Článok 50 7.
|
Komisia podporuje a uľahčuje vypracúvanie kódexov postupov na úrovni Únie s cieľom uľahčiť účinné vykonávanie povinností týkajúcich sa odhaľovania, značenia a označovania umelo vygenerovaného alebo zmanipulovaného obsahu. Komisia s maximálnym prihliadnutím na názor rady pre AI posúdi, či je dodržiavanie týchto kódexov postupov primerané na zabezpečenie splnenia povinností stanovených v odsekoch 2 a 4 tohto článku, v súlade s postupom stanoveným v článku 56 ods. 6 . Ak sa Komisia domnieva, že kódex postupov je neprimeraný, môže prijať vykonávací akt, v ktorom stanoví spoločné pravidlá vykonávania týchto povinností v súlade s postupom preskúmania stanoveným v článku 98 ods. 2.
|
,
1.1 Odkazy
1.2 Identifikované požiadavky
1.3 Súvisiace štandardy
2. Identifikované požiadavky
Požiadavky
| Zdroj |
Požiadavka |
3. Súvisiace štandardy
Štandardy
| Zdroj |
Požiadavka |
|
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.
|
|