# AI threats to national security can be countered through an incident regime

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.19887 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19887/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 8 of its 68 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Mar 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1412.6572/) (2014)
- [GPT-4o System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21276/) (2024)
- [The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.00626/) (2022)
- [An Overview of Catastrophic AI Risks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.12001/) (2023)
- [Spear Phishing With Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06972/) (2023)
- [Safety Cases: How to Justify the Safety of Advanced AI Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.10462/) (2024)
- [Safety case template for frontier AI: A cyber inability argument](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.08088/) (2024)
- [Automated Behavioral Analysis of Malware A Case Study of WannaCry Ransomware](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.08753/) (2017)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Clear, Compelling Arguments: Rethinking the Foundations of Frontier AI Safety Cases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.08760/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent progress in AI capabilities has heightened concerns that AI systems could pose a threat to national security, for example, by making it easier for malicious actors to perform cyberattacks on critical national infrastructure, or through loss of control of autonomous AI systems. In parallel, federal legislators in the US have proposed nascent 'AI incident regimes' to identify and counter similar threats. In this paper, we consolidate these two trends and present a timely proposal for a legally mandated post-deployment AI incident regime that aims to counter potential national security threats from AI systems. We start the paper by introducing the concept of 'security-critical' to describe sectors that pose extreme risks to national security, before arguing that 'security-critical' describes civilian nuclear power, aviation, life science dual-use research of concern, and frontier AI development. We then present in detail our AI incident regime proposal, justifying each component of the proposal by demonstrating its similarity to US domestic incident regimes in other 'security-critical' sectors. Finally, we sketch a hypothetical scenario where our proposed AI incident regime deals with an AI cyber incident. Our proposed AI incident regime is split into three phases. The first phase revolves around a novel operationalization of what counts as an 'AI incident' and we suggest that AI providers must create a 'national security case' before deploying a frontier AI system. The second and third phases spell out that AI providers should notify a government agency about incidents, and that the government agency should be involved in amending AI providers' security and safety procedures, in order to counter future threats to national security.