Adapting cybersecurity frameworks to manage frontier AI risks: A defense-in-depth approach
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The complex and evolving threat landscape of frontier AI development requires a multi-layered approach to risk management ("defense-in-depth"). By reviewing cybersecurity and AI frameworks, we outline three approaches that can help identify gaps in the management of AI-related risks. First, a functional approach identifies essential categories of activities ("functions") that a risk management approach should cover, as in the NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) and AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF). Second, a lifecycle approach instead assigns safety and security activities across the model development lifecycle, as in DevSecOps and the OECD AI lifecycle framework. Third, a threat-based approach identifies tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) used by malicious actors, as in the MITRE ATT&CK and MITRE ATLAS databases. We recommend that frontier AI developers and policymakers begin by adopting the functional approach, given the existence of the NIST AI RMF and other supplementary guides, but also establish a detailed frontier AI lifecycle model and threat-based TTP databases for future use.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 15 Aug 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4.
4 papers.
- 2025Distributional AGI Safetycited by 8
- 2025Neural Chameleons: Language Models Can Learn to Hide Their Thoughts from Unseen Activation Monitorscited by 7
- 2025AI Governance through Marketscited by 5
- 2025Organizational Adaptation to Generative AI in Cybersecuritycited by 0
- 2025Distributional AGI Safety18 Dec 2025
- 2025Neural Chameleons: Language Models Can Learn to Hide Their Thoughts from Unseen Activation Monitors12 Dec 2025
- 2025Organizational Adaptation to Generative AI in Cybersecurity31 May 2025
- 2025AI Governance through Markets29 Jan 2025