AI Security WikiEvidence before assurance.

DASF-R-10.2 — Output manipulation

Source: official compendium, AI Lifecycle Risks, row 52. Snapshot: 2026-10-22; source revision: DASF v 1.0.

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

Risk mechanism

An attacker can compromise a machine learning system by tweaking its output stream, also known as a man-in-the-middle attack. This is achieved by intercepting the data transmission between the model’s endpoint, which generates its predictions or outputs, and the intended receiver of this information. Such an attack poses a severe security threat, allowing the attacker to read or alter the communicated results, potentially leading to data leakage, misinformation or misguided actions based on manipulated data.

Applicability

Predictive ML Models · Fine-tuned LLMs · Pre-trained LLMs · Foundational LLMs · External Models

Blank source cells remain null (unspecified); a source “No” means this default filter omits the risk; it does not establish absence in your architecture. Combine every deployment pattern in the system.

Impacts described by the source

AI system:

• Misinformation in AI System Outputs • Misguided Actions in AI System Outputs • Regulatory Non-compliance • Failure to Achieve Organizational AI Strategy and Goals

Business:

• Financial Loss • Regulatory Fines and Judgement • Legal Fines • Customer Retention

Controls

  • DASF-30 — Encrypt models
  • DASF-31 — Secure model serving endpoints
  • DASF-32 — Govern and monitor access of AI model and model serving endpoints
  • DASF-60 — Rate limit number of inference queries

Source control guidance

• DASF 30: Encrypt models for model endpoints with encryption in transit • DASF 31: Secure model serving endpoints • DASF 32: Streamline the usage and management of various large language model (LLM) providers to rate-limit inference queries allowed by the model. Then audit, reproduce and make your models more compliant. • DASF 60: Rate limit number of inference queries to control capacity and ensure availability of the model serving

Investigate and verify

Project adaptation: use the evidence workflow, then request investigate_risk with DASF-R-10.2. It returns the mechanism above, control-specific evidence requests, proposed tests and remediation acceptance criteria. Until evidence is supplied, the result is unverified. Use the finding template to record a concrete observation and residual risk.

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 no mapping
MITRE ATTACK as of Q3 2024 no mapping
OWASP LLM Top 10 2025 LLM01: Prompt Injection<br>LLM02: Insecure Output Handling<br>LLM04: Model Denial of Service<br>LLM05: Supply Chain Vulnerabilities<br>LLM10: Model Theft
OWASP ML Top 10 v0.3 ML01:2023 Input Manipulation Attack<br>ML02:2023 Data Poisoning Attack<br>ML03:2023 Model Inversion Attack<br>ML04:2023 Membership Inference Attack<br>ML05:2023 Model Theft<br>ML07:2023 Transfer Learning Attack<br>ML08:2023 Model Skewing<br>ML09:2023 Output Integrity Attack<br>ML10:2023 Model Poisoning
OWASP Agentic AI – Threats and Mitigations no mapping
NIST - 800- 53 - Rev 5 SC-8:Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, <br>SC-16:Transmission of Security and Privacy Attributes, <br>SC-23:Session Authenticity, <br>SI-4:System Monitoring, <br>SI-7:Software, Firmware, and Information Integrity
NIST 800-53 Controls Mapping Rationale Encryption and integrity mechanisms to protect against output manipulation during model inference responses.
HITRUST no mapping
ENISA’s Securing ML Algorithms Apply a RBAC Model, Respecting the Least Privilege Principle.<br>Reduce the Available Information About the Model.<br>Reduce the Information Given by the Model.<br>Add Some Adversarial Examples to the Training Dataset.<br>Apply Modifications on Inputs.<br>Choose and Define a More Resilient Model Design<br>Implement Tools to Detect if a Data Point Is an Adversarial Example or Not.<br>Ensure that Models Respect Differential Privacy to a Sufficient Degree.
ISO 42001:2023 Controls Objectives and Controls (Annex A) A.4.4 Tooling resources<br>A.6.2.6 AI system operation and monitoring
ISO 27001:2022 Information Security Control Reference (Annex A) A.8.20 Networks security<br>A.8.24 Use of cryptography
EU AI Act no mapping
CSA MCP Security (blank in source)
OWASP MCP TOP 10 (blank in source)