Law / Frameworks / NIST AI RMF / Measure
NIST AI RMF, MeasureMEASURE 2.7
AI system security and resilience – as identified in the MAP function – are evaluated and documented.NIST AI Risk Management Framework, version 1.0, January 2023 (NIST AI 100-1), MEASURE 2.7
We read each law below as bearing on this control. That does not mean the control, done well, meets the law: what each law asks is on its own page. Law library as of .
- 10
- laws
- 7
- jurisdictions
- 0
- with court rulings behind them
- 3
- not yet in force
- 1
- proposed, not law
Related controls in other frameworks the same duties, in at least two laws we track, reach both
- NIST AI 600-1GAI-RISK-04 Data Privacy, 3 laws
- NIST AI 600-1GAI-RISK-09 Information Security, 3 laws
- NIST AI 600-1GAI-RISK-07 Human-AI Configuration, 2 laws
- NIST AI 200-24.3 Composing a TEVV Toolbox, 5 laws
- NIST AI 200-22.2 Define & Construct, 3 laws
- NIST AI 200-22.3 Apply & Measure, 2 laws
- OWASP LLM Top 10LLM01:2026 Prompt Injection, 3 laws
- OWASP LLM Top 10LLM02:2026 Sensitive Information Disclosure, 3 laws
- OWASP LLM Top 10LLM04:2026 Supply Chain, 3 laws
- 2 more in the OWASP LLM Top 10
- OWASP Agentic Top 10ASI01 Agent Goal Hijack, 3 laws
- OWASP Agentic Top 10ASI03 Identity and Privilege Abuse, 3 laws
- OWASP Agentic Top 10ASI04 Agentic Supply Chain Vulnerabilities, 3 laws
- 1 more in the OWASP Agentic Top 10
- MIT mitigations2.1 Model & Infrastructure Security, 3 laws
- MIT mitigations2.3 Model Safety Engineering, 3 laws
- MIT mitigations3.1 Testing & Auditing, 3 laws
- 5 more in the MIT mitigations
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-007 Legal and Contractual Frameworks for AI Systems, 4 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-008 Quality of Service (QoS) and DDoS Prevention for AI Systems, 4 laws
- FINOS AIGFAIR-PREV-012 Role-Based Access Control for AI Data, 4 laws
- 10 more in the FINOS AIGF
- ETSI EN 304 2235.1.2-2 System built to hold up against adversarial attacks, unexpected inputs and failures., 3 laws
- ETSI EN 304 2235.1.3-1 Threat modelling and risk management, reviewed regularly and covering..., 3 laws
- ETSI EN 304 2235.2.1-4 Sensitive data such as training and test sets protected from unauthorised access., 3 laws
- 5 more in the ETSI EN 304 223
A law in force is unmarked; the rest wear their state: not yet in force proposed
AI sector rules
4 laws, 3 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| OSFI Guideline E-23, Model Risk Management (2027) from , in 6 months |
You should deploy models in an environment with quality and change control processes, test that the model operates as expected in production, document deployment procedures, and assess related risks such as cybersecurity risk and infrastructure vulnerabilities before deployment (see OSFI Guidelines B-13 and E-21). |
|
| Väärtpaberituru seadus Sections 82^15 and 82^16, Algorithmic Trading and Direct Electronic Access Controls |
Keep an effective business continuity arrangement for trading system failures and test the systems fully (section 82^15(5)). |
|
| EBA Guidelines on loan origination and monitoring (EBA/GL/2020/06), automated models and model governance |
Institutions should understand the quality of data and inputs to the model, detect and prevent bias in the credit decision-making process, and ensure safeguards for the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information and systems (paragraph 53(e)). |
|
| MiFID II Algorithmic Trading Controls: Resilient Systems, Testing, Kill Functionality, Records and Notification (Article 17 and RTS 6) |
Have in place effective systems and risk controls to ensure your trading systems cannot be used for any purpose that is contrary to Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or to the rules of a trading venue to which you are connected, and effective business continuity arrangements to deal with any failure of your trading systems; ensure your systems are fully tested and properly monitored (Article 17(1)). Perform a self-assessment and validation process annually and on that basis issue a validation report that reviews, evaluates and validates your algorithmic trading systems, trading algorithms and strategies, your governance, accountability and approval framework, your business continuity arrangement and your overall compliance with Article 17 of Directive 2014/65/EU; have the risk management function draw up the report, have the internal audit function audit it where one exists, obtain the approval of senior management, and remedy any deficiencies it identifies (Article 9). As part of that self-assessment, test that your algorithmic trading systems and the controls in Articles 12 to 18 can withstand increased order flows or market stresses, with high messaging volume tests and high trade volume tests using the highest volumes of the previous six months multiplied by two, carried out in a way that does not affect the production environment (Article 10). +1 more |
AI governance
2 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| AI Act, Article 55 (obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models with systemic risk) |
If your general-purpose AI model is classified as a model with systemic risk under Article 51, whether by high-impact capabilities (presumed above 10^25 floating-point operations of training) or by a Commission decision, in addition to your Article 53 duties, perform model evaluation using standardised, state-of-the-art protocols and tools, including conducting and documenting adversarial testing to identify and mitigate systemic risks. Ensure an adequate level of cybersecurity protection for your model and its physical infrastructure. |
|
| Federal Law No. 243-FZ, Article 8, Duties of Sovereign and National Foundation Model Developers from , in 4 months |
If you develop a sovereign or national large foundation AI model, take organizational and technical measures to secure it, define operating rules covering restrictions, conditions of use, updates, and decommissioning, and maintain technical documentation of its key parameters and limitations sufficient to assess the safety of its application. |
AI risk obligations
2 laws, 2 jurisdictions| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| AI Act, Article 15 (accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity) from , in 13 months |
If you are the provider of a high-risk AI system, design and develop it to achieve an appropriate level of accuracy, robustness and cybersecurity, held consistently throughout its lifecycle. Make your high-risk AI system resilient against attempts by unauthorised third parties to alter its use, outputs or performance by exploiting vulnerabilities, with technical solutions appropriate to the circumstances and the risk. +1 more |
|
| Decreto Legislativo 160/2026, After-the-Fact Facial Recognition Integrated in Video Surveillance (Art. 10) |
Allow access only to authorised persons, and record accesses and processing operations automatically in non-modifiable log files kept for five years (art. 10, comma 8). |
AI transparency
1 law, 1 jurisdiction| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| New York City | Chatbot Data Privacy, Security, and Transparency proposed |
It would require a chatbot provider to maintain a comprehensive data security program, with administrative, technical and physical safeguards proportionate to the personal data and chat logs it holds, and to make the program publicly available on its website. |
Comprehensive regime
1 law, 1 jurisdiction| Jurisdiction | Law | What it asks, as read here |
|---|---|---|
| Superintendencia Circular on AI and Personal Data |
Adopt technological, human, administrative, physical and contractual security measures to prevent unauthorized access to, manipulation, destruction, or unauthorized use or circulation of personal data processed in an artificial intelligence system, and keep those measures auditable by the authorities. |
Full text of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, public domain (a US government work). Every control of the framework.