AI Control Library / CF-03: AI Supply Chain & Third-Party Risk
Designation: Core | Control types represented: Operational
Control requirement
Assess whether AI supply chain controls and commitments are supported by relevant evidence, covering the service, period and operating conditions on which the organization relies. Track gaps and verify corrective actions.
Why this matters
A certificate or audit report can cover a different service, configuration or time period. Compliance assessment needs to establish what the evidence actually supports and what the customer still needs to perform.
How the control types work together
Operational controls establish the supplier assessment, ownership, agreement and review processes described here. They work when the assigned parties perform the required activities and use evidence to guide decisions.
When it applies
Supplier assurance evidence for AI services and components, including reports, certifications, questionnaires, test results and customer responsibilities.
Tailor review depth to information sensitivity, granted authority and business dependence. Record what the organization can test directly, what relies on provider evidence and how material visibility gaps affect the acceptance decision.
Ownership
The supplier assurance lead performs the review with security and compliance specialists; service owners address customer-side conditions.
Implementation guidance
- Identify the applicable requirements and the exact service, boundary and period being assessed.
- Evaluate evidence scope, independence, currency, qualifications, exclusions and customer control requirements; seek clarification for material gaps.
- Compare evidence with actual deployment and contractual commitments, distinguishing supported findings from unanswered questions.
- Assign remediation, additional verification or use restrictions and reassess after significant findings, expiry or service changes.
How to verify it
Use representative deployment records and authorized controlled tests. Establish the assessed service, artifact version and acceptance conditions before interpreting results; do not extend evidence beyond the boundary it covers.
| Test | Expected result |
|---|---|
| Inspect an assurance report used for approval | Its scope and period cover the relied-on service or a documented gap treatment exists. |
| Trace a customer responsibility | The organization has implemented and verified its assigned activity. |
| Review a material supplier finding | Corrective action or a justified restriction is recorded and followed through. |
Record a finding when a required result cannot be demonstrated or actual practice differs materially from the accepted conditions. Assign corrective action and verify the affected boundary before closing the issue.
Evidence to retain
- Assurance requirement and evidence matrix
- Scope and qualification review
- Customer control verification
- Findings and remediation records
Protect supplier-confidential information, credentials and personal data in these records. Preserve enough version and scope information to establish which service or artifact the evidence supports.
If the control fails
Escalate unsupported material assurance claims or unresolved findings to the service and risk authorities. Limit reliance on the affected service until evidence and controls support the use.
Example in practice
Hypothetical example: A supplier provides a platform audit report that excludes the newly acquired AI product. The reviewer does not extend the report’s conclusion to that product and requests relevant evidence or restricts onboarding.
Related controls
- CF03-006: AI Supply Chain Risk Assessment
- CF03-010: AI Supply Chain Provider Compliance Requirements
- CF04-004: AI Compliance Verification
Framework mappings
- CSA AICM (STA-12)
- NIST AI RMF (MEASURE 2.7)
- ISO 42001 (Cl. 9.2, A9.1)
Review and maintenance
Review at the interval approved by the control owner and after relevant supplier, component, contract, access or deployment changes. Reassess material incidents and new evidence, updating acceptance conditions and verifying corrective actions where required.
Back to AI Supply Chain & Third-Party Risk
Version 1.0