AI Security WikiEvidence before assurance.

DASF-R-10.5 — Black-box attacks

Source: official compendium, AI Lifecycle Risks, row 55. 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

Public or compromised private model serving connectors (e.g., API interfaces) are vulnerable to black-box attacks. Although black-box attacks generally require more trial-and-error attempts (inferences), they are notable for requiring significantly less access to the target system. Successful black-box attacks quickly erode trust in enterprises serving the model connectors.

Applicability

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

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:

• Disruption of Business Operations and Service Availability • Cyber Security Incident • Loss of AI System Integrity • Regulatory Non-compliance Failure to Achieve Organizational AI Strategy and Goals

Business:

• Financial Loss • Response Costs • Direct Business Interruption • Legal Fines • Customer Retention • Regulatory Fines and Judgement

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-10.5. 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 AC-6:Least Privilege,<br>AC-17:Remote Access, <br>SC-7:Boundary Protection, <br>SC-8:Transmission Confidentiality and Integrity, <br>SC-28:Protection of Information at Rest, <br>AU-2:Event Logging, <br>AU-6:Audit Record Review, Analysis, and Reporting, <br>CM-2:Baseline Configuration,<br>CM-7:Least Functionality,<br>SI-4:System Monitoring
NIST 800-53 Controls Mapping Rationale Prevents black-box attacks by enforcing strong access control, encryption, and integrity monitoring for ML serving systems.
HITRUST no mapping
ENISA’s Securing ML Algorithms Reduce the Available Information About the Model.<br>Reduce the Information Given by the Model.<br>Apply Modifications on Inputs.<br>Implement Tools to Detect If a Data Point is an Adversarial Example or Not.<br>Choose and Define a More Resilient Model Design.
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)