AI Control Library / CF-12: Security & Abuse Resistance
Designation: Supplemental | Control types represented: Operational and Technical
Control requirement
Provision AI access through authorized requests tied to a verified identity, defined role and legitimate purpose. Confirm that effective permissions match the approved request before access becomes usable.
Why this matters
Informal grants and copied permissions can import unrelated privileges. A reliable process connects the business need to the actual access created.
How the control types work together
Operational controls define scope, authority and the actions required when conditions are not met. Technical controls produce evidence or enforce the relevant boundaries. Both must apply to the same deployment and operating conditions.
When it applies
Apply to employees, contractors, suppliers, workloads and agents. Include bulk provisioning, temporary access and changes to existing roles.
Define the assessed boundary, dependencies and evidence limitations. Tailor depth and review frequency to potential impact, and document why a particular safeguard or exclusion is appropriate to the actual deployment.
Ownership
Resource owners approve grants; identity administrators provision them; sponsors confirm continuing need.
Implementation guidance
- Collect identity, purpose, resources and requested duration.
- Obtain approval from the accountable resource owner.
- Provision the minimum role through controlled mechanisms.
- Verify effective access and record expiry and review obligations.
How to verify it
Use representative records and authorized controlled tests. Identify the relevant version, operating conditions and expected result before testing, and retain enough evidence to support the conclusion.
| Test | Expected result |
|---|---|
| Unapproved request | No access is granted. |
| Provisioned account | Effective rights match approval. |
| Temporary grant | Expiry is configured and tested. |
Record a finding when required results cannot be demonstrated or practice differs materially from the approved conditions. Missing evidence limits the conclusion; it should not be treated as a successful test.
Evidence to retain
- Access requests
- Owner approvals
- Provisioning logs
- Permission verification
Protect evidence according to its sensitivity, access needs and retention rules. Avoid unnecessary copies of personal information, secrets or confidential material, while preserving the records needed for authorized review.
If the control fails
Revoke erroneous grants, assess any use and correct provisioning rules or templates before repeating the process.
Example in practice
Hypothetical example: A new evaluator receives access to a test dataset through an approved role. Production prompts and model administration remain inaccessible.
Related controls
- CF12-002: AI System Least Privilege Access Control
- CF12-S02: AI System Identity Inventory
- CF12-S05: AI System Access Revocation
Framework mappings
- CSA AICM (IAM-06)
- NIST AI RMF (MAP 1.1)
- ISO 42001 (Cl. 8.2)
Review and maintenance
Review at the interval approved by the control owner and after relevant changes, incidents or failed assessments. Update affected procedures and configuration, address evidence gaps and verify corrective action before closing findings.
Back to Security & Abuse Resistance
Version 1.0