AAISM Exam Dumps - Isaca AI-Centric Security Management Questions and Answers

AAISM requires that control selection be threat-led and context-specific, aligning AI threats to the organization’s existing enterprise control catalogs (security, privacy, resilience) and augmenting them with AI-specific safeguards where coverage is insufficient. This ensures consistency with the risk appetite, removes duplication, and closes AI-unique gaps (e.g., prompt injection, data leakage from context windows, model misuse). Generic reliance on vendors or uncustomized external frameworks does not ensure fit-for-purpose coverage, and deferring control selection to post-deployment contradicts proactive risk treatment.

AI/ML threat modeling is the most effective structured method to both identify and address model security risks. It systematically surfaces attack classes (poisoning, evasion, membership inference, model extraction, inversion), maps system-specific attack surfaces (data pipelines, feature stores, training artifacts, inference APIs), and drives prioritized mitigations (ingestion validation, robust training, rate-limiting, watermarking, differential privacy, monitoring, red teaming). Output spot-checking (A) finds errors but not security vulnerabilities; encryption (C) protects confidentiality but does not reveal threats or mitigate inference-time attacks; adding data (D) may improve accuracy but does not target adversarial risk.

The AAISM guidance defines risk minimization for AI deployment as requiring a formalized AI model life cycle policy and associated procedures. This ensures oversight from design to deployment, covering data handling, bias testing, monitoring, retraining, decommissioning, and acceptable use. Limiting usage to developer-defined scenarios or relying on vendor mechanisms transfers responsibility away from the organization and fails to meet governance expectations. Training and awareness support cultural alignment but cannot substitute for structured lifecycle controls. Therefore, the establishment of a documented lifecycle policy and procedures is the most comprehensive way to minimize operational, compliance, and ethical risks in integrating foundation models.

The greatest immediate risk from unsanctioned use of public or open-source generative AI tools is data leakage—employees may paste confidential or regulated information into third-party systems, resulting in loss of confidentiality, regulatory exposure, and loss of intellectual property. AAISM emphasizes that when AI use occurs outside approved channels, the top control priority is preventing exfiltration of sensitive data via prompts, attachments, and context sharing. Monitoring and policy are necessary enablers, but leakage is the highest-impact failure mode in the short term; hallucinations primarily affect accuracy, not confidentiality.

Restricting access to sensitive data and artifacts (e.g., training data, feature stores, model weights, prompts, system designs) using least-privilege, segregation, encryption, and monitoring is the most effective way to protect trade secrets throughout the AI lifecycle. Patents require public disclosure, trademarks protect branding (not secrets), and output watermarks help provenance/abuse deterrence but do not secure underlying proprietary know-how.

The AAISM study materials highlight that AI-powered security tools provide the greatest benefit by reducing false positives in monitoring and access control systems. This improves efficiency, prevents alert fatigue, and enables security teams to focus on true threats. While timely analysis and incident response are benefits, they are not unique to AI-based tools and can be achieved with traditional methods. AI also does not remove the need for data classification, as classification underpins governance and compliance. The standout advantage is the improved accuracy and reduced false positives provided by AI.