HITRUST CSF requirement statement [?] (New in v11.4.0, coming in Nov. 2024)

The organization’s established security incident detection and response processes 
address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) 
through 
(1) updates to the organization’s security incident plans / playbooks; 
(2) consideration of AI-specific threats in security incident tabletop exercises; 
(3) recording the specifics of AI-specific security incidents that have occurred;
and incorporating 
(4) logs and 
(5) alerts 
from deployed AI systems into the organization’s monitoring and security 
incident detection tools.

Evaluative elements in this requirement statement [?]
1. The organization’s established security incident detection and response processes
address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) 
through updates to the organization’s security incident plans / playbooks.
2. The organization’s established security incident detection and response processes 
address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) 
through consideration of AI-specific threats in security incident tabletop exercises.
3. The organization’s established security incident detection and response processes 
address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) 
through recording the specifics of AI-specific security incidents that have occurred.
4. The organization’s established security incident detection and response processes 
address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) 
through and incorporating logs from deployed AI systems into the organization’s 
monitoring and security incident detection tools.
5. The organization’s established security incident detection and response processes 
address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) 
through and incorporating alerts from deployed AI systems into the organization’s 
monitoring and security incident detection tools.


Illustrative procedures for use during assessments [?]

  • Policy: Examine policies related to each evaluative element within the requirement statement. Validate the existence of a written or undocumented policy as defined in the HITRUST scoring rubric.

  • Procedure: Examine evidence that written or undocumented procedures exist as defined in the HITRUST scoring rubric. Determine if the procedures and address the operational aspects of how to perform each evaluative element within the requirement statement.

  • Implemented: Examine evidence that all evaluative elements within the requirement statement have been implemented as defined in the HITRUST scoring rubric, using a sample-based test where possible for each evaluative element. Example test(s):
    • For example, review the AI system to ensure the organization’s established security incident detection and response processes address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) through updates to the organization’s security incident plans / playbooks; consideration of AI-specific threats in security incident tabletop exercises; recording the specifics of AI-specific security incidents that have occurred. Further, confirm monitoring and security incident detection tools incorporate the logs and alerts from deployed AI systems.

  • Measured: Examine measurements that formally evaluate and communicate the operation and/or performance of each evaluative element within the requirement statement. Determine the percentage of evaluative elements addressed by the organization’s operational and/or independent measure(s) or metric(s) as defined in the HITRUST scoring rubric. Determine if the measurements include independent and/or operational measure(s) or metric(s) as defined in the HITRUST scoring rubric. Example test(s):
    • For example, measures indicate if the organization’s established security incident detection and response processes address the detection of and recovery from AI-specific threats (e.g., poisoning, evasion) through updates to the organization’s security incident plans / playbooks; consideration of AI-specific threats in security incident tabletop exercises; recording the specifics of AI-specific security incidents that have occurred. Reviews, tests, or audits are completed by the organization to measure the effectiveness of the implemented controls and to confirm that monitoring and security incident detection tools incorporate the logs and alerts from deployed AI systems.

  • Managed: Examine evidence that a written or undocumented risk treatment process exists, as defined in the HITRUST scoring rubric. Determine the frequency that the risk treatment process was applied to issues identified for each evaluative element within the requirement statement.

Placement of this requirement in the HITRUST CSF [?]

  • Assessment domain: 15 Incident Management
  • Control category: 11.0 – Information Security Incident Management
  • Control reference: 11.c- Responsibilities and Procedures

Specific to which parts of the overall AI system? [?]
  • N/A, not AI component-specific


Discussed in which authoritative AI security sources? [?]
  • LLM AI Cybersecurity & Governance Checklist
    Feb. 2024, © The OWASP Foundation
    • Where:
      • 3. Checklist > 3.1. Adversarial risk > Bullet #3
      • 3. Checklist > 3.9. Using or implementing large language model solutions > Bullet #13

  • Securing Machine Learning Algorithms
    2021, © European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA)
    • Where: 4.1- Security Controls > Organizational: Include ML applications into detection and response to security incident processes

Discussed in which commercial AI security sources? [?]
  • Databricks AI Security Framework
    Sept. 2024, © Databricks
    • Where: Control DASF 39: Platform security – Incident response team

  • Google Secure AI Framework
    June 2023, © Google
    • Where:
      • Step 4. Apply the six core elements of the SAIF > Extend detection and response to bring AI into an organization’s threat universe > Prepare to respond to attacks against AI and also to issues raised by AI output
      • Step 4. Apply the six core elements of the SAIF > Extend detection and response to bring AI into an organization’s threat universe > Adjust your abuse policy and incident response processes to AI-specific incident types such as malicious content creation or AI privacy violoations

  • HiddenLayer’s 2024 AI Threat Landscape Report
    2024, © HiddenLayer
    • Where: Part 4: Predictions and recommendations > 6. Continuous monitoring and incident response > Bullet 2

  • Snowflake AI Security Framework
    2024, © Snowflake Inc.
    • Where: Backdooring models (insider attacks) > Mitigations > Adversary detection and response

Helps to prevent, detect, and/or correct which AI security threats? [?]


Additional information
  • Q: When will this requirement included in an assessment? [?]
    • This requirement will always be added to HITRUST assessments which include the
      Cybersecurity for deployed AI systems regulatory factor.
    • No other assessment tailoring factors affect this requirement.

  • Q: Will this requirement be externally inheritable? [?] [?]
    • No (dual responsibility). The AI application provider and its AI service providers (if used) are responsible for independently performing this requirement outside of the AI system’s technology stack.

Feedback

Thanks for your feedback.

Post your comment on this topic.

Please do not use this for support questions.
Feedback portal link

Post Comment