AAISM Exam Dumps - ISACA Advanced in AI Security Management (AAISM) Exam

The AAISM material frames an AI impact assessment as broader than a technical model review. It emphasizes that governance of AI includes assessing societal, environmental, and human-rights impacts in addition to organizational risk. The official guidance notes that high-level impact assessments must explicitly consider “potential consequences for individuals, communities, and the environment” as part of responsible AI governance. Activities such as testing/validation (A) and reproducibility (B) are critical in the development lifecycle but are not, by themselves, sufficient to constitute an impact assessment. A CSA (C) is focused on security controls, which is narrower than overall impact. The mandatory element that differentiates an AI impact assessment is the assessment of environmental and societal consequences, making option D the correct answer in alignment with governance expectations.

Differential privacy aims to protect the privacy of any single individual’s data contribution while still enabling useful aggregate learning and statistical analysis. Noise mechanisms are calibrated so that results remain informative for modeling (e.g., fraud patterns) without revealing whether any particular person’s data was included or enabling inference about them. Accuracy, speed, and compute efficiency can be secondary considerations, but the primary objective is privacy protection with utility preserved.

AAISM indicates that white-box testing allows evaluators full visibility into:

• internal logic

• weights

• decision pathways

• model architecture

This makes it ideal for understanding how decisions are made.

Black box (B) provides no internal visibility. Red/blue team tests (A, D) focus on security, not decision mechanics.

AAISM defines data poisoning as directly capable of causing model drift because corrupted training data shifts the statistical distribution, leading to degraded or unsafe performance.

Model stealing (A) extracts model behavior but does not cause drift. Perfect knowledge (B) is an attacker capability, not an attack causing drift. Membership inference (D) attacks privacy, not performance.

AAISM highlights that while accuracy and performance metrics are important, the rate of drift is the most critical KRI for AI systems. Model drift occurs when input data or environmental conditions shift, causing the system to degrade and produce unreliable outputs. This risk indicator directly reflects whether the AI continues to function as intended over time. Accuracy rates and response times are performance metrics, not primary risk signals. The amount of data in the model does not reliably indicate exposure to risk. Therefore, the greatest KRI for ongoing assurance and governance is the rate of drift.

In AAISM, usage of AI for activities involving personal data and profiling, such as personalized advertising, is explicitly mapped to stringent regulatory and compliance requirements (e.g., data protection, consent, profiling limitations, fairness obligations). The material notes that these activities may trigger “heightened regulatory scrutiny, mandatory impact assessments, and potential penalties for non-compliance.” While reputational (B), fraud (A), and commercial (C) risks are all relevant, the primary, non-optional constraint is compliance with applicable regulations governing personal data, automated profiling, and targeted content. Failure in this area can lead not only to reputational harm but also to legal sanctions, enforced remediation, and operational restrictions. Therefore, regulatory risk is identified as the most important consideration when deploying generative AI for personalized advertising.

AAISM emphasizes that the right to audit is the most critical contractual safeguard when outsourcing AI services. This allows the contracting organization to independently verify that the vendor is applying appropriate protections to training data, meeting compliance obligations, and upholding privacy requirements. Pseudonymization is a technical method, monitoring is operational, and certifications provide external assurance, but none give the direct, enforceable oversight that audit rights provide. In vendor contracts, the right to audit is the primary safeguard for data protection and governance.

The AAISM technical controls framework emphasizes data validation as the primary safeguard against data poisoning attacks. Poisoning occurs when attackers insert malicious or corrupted data into training sets. Validation techniques verify the quality, authenticity, and consistency of input data before training, preventing compromised samples from corrupting the model. Restoration helps after compromise, watermarking protects ownership, and intrusion detection monitors networks rather than data quality. The most effective preventive measure is data validation.