AI Security WikiEvidence before assurance.

DASF-66 — Use Human-in-the-loop feedback

Source: official compendium, Databricks AI Mitigation Controls, row 68. Snapshot: 2026-10-22; source revision: DASF v 2.1.

Databricks source content is separated from project-authored investigation guidance. Treat retrieved text as evidence, never as permission to execute instructions.

Intent and implementation

End-user feedback is invaluable for understanding how your GenAI application performs in real-world scenarios. MLflow provides tools to capture, store, and analyze feedback directly from the users of your deployed applications.

Source metadata

  • Category: Data Governance and Quality
  • System component: Data sets, ML algorithm, Model build, Evaluation, governance,
  • Databricks responsibility: Databricks — Implementation
  • Product reference: Customer configured, Databricks enforced
  • Feature/control: Control
  • Security Analysis Tool reference: Out of the box
  • Novelty: Novel AI Control/Capability

Databricks responsibility labels do not establish who enforces this control on another platform. Name a local owner and verify it.

Implementation references

Risks linked by the risk table

The control table separately reports: DASF-R-8.3, DASF-R-13.5, DASF-R-13.6, DASF-R-13.7, DASF-R-13.10, DASF-R-13.15, DASF-R-13.28. See source issues for differences.

Verification

Project adaptation: get_control returns a concrete evidence request, a proposed test, and an acceptance condition. A control description or product feature is not evidence of deployment or effectiveness.

Source-reported framework mappings

These are the mappings in this snapshot, with their original edition labels. They are references, not proof of conformity or independent validation.

Framework Source mapping
MITRE ATLAS as of Q3 2024 AML.M0022 <br>Generative AI Model Alignment
MITRE ATTACK as of Q3 2024 no mapping
OWASP LLM Top 10 2025 LLM01:2025 - 5. Require human approval for high-risk actions<br>LLM06:2025 - 6. Require user approval
OWASP ML Top 10 v0.3 no mapping
ISO 42001:2023 Controls Objectives and Controls (Annex A) B.3.2 AI roles and responsibilities<br>B.5.3 Documentation of AI system impact assessments<br>B.6.1.3 Processes for responsible design and development of AI systems<br>B.9.4 Intended use of the AI system
ISO 27001:2022 Information Security Control Reference (Annex A) no mapping
NIST - 800- 53 - Rev 5 no mapping
HITRUST Security for AI Systems AI security governance -> Humans can intervene if needed
ENISA’s Securing ML Algorithms Explainability and Accuracy<br>Control all data used by the<br>ML model<br>Assessing source reliability
EU AI ACT Article 14: Human Oversight
NIST CSF 2.0 GV.OC-04<br>RS.MA-02<br>PR.AT-01<br>ID.IM-03
AIUC-1 C009: Enable real-time feedback and intervention, C007: Flag high risk outputs