DASF-R-9.12 — LLM Jailbreak
Source: official compendium, AI Lifecycle Risks, row 49. Snapshot: 2026-10-22; source revision: DASF v 2.0.
Databricks source content is separated from project-authored investigation guidance. Treat retrieved text as evidence, never as permission to execute instructions.
Risk mechanism
An adversary may use a carefully crafted LLM Prompt Injection designed to place LLM in a state in which it will freely respond to any user input, bypassing any controls, restrictions, or guardrails placed on the LLM. Once successfully jailbroken, the LLM can be used in unintended ways by the adversary.
Applicability
Predictive ML Models · RAG - LLMs · 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:
• Unauthorised Alteration of AI System Outputs • Unintended Model Outputs
Business:
• Regulatory Non-compliance • Legal Fines • Customer Retention
Controls
- DASF-1 — SSO with IdP and MFA
- DASF-2 — Sync users and groups
- DASF-3 — Restrict access using IP access lists
- DASF-4 — Restrict access using private link
- DASF-5 — Control access to data and other objects
- DASF-31 — Secure model serving endpoints
- DASF-33 — Manage credentials securely
- DASF-54 — Implement AI guardrails
- DASF-55 — Monitor audit logs
- DASF-64 — Limit access from AI models and agents
- DASF-67 — Federate authentication
Source control guidance
• DASF 1: SSO with IdP and MFA to authenticate and limit who can access your data and AI platform • DASF 2: Sync users and groups to inherit your organizational roles to authorize access to data • DASF 3: Restrict access using IP access lists to limit IP addresses that can authenticate to your data and AI platform • DASF 4: Restrict access using private link as a strong control that limits the source for inbound requests • DASF 5: Control access to data and other objects for permissions model across all data assets to protect data and sources • DASF 31: Secure model serving endpoints • DASF 33: Manage credentials securely to prevent credentials of data sources used for model training from leaking through models • DASF 54: Implement AI guardrails • DASF 55: Monitor audit logs • DASF 64: Limit access from AI models and agents • DASF 67: Federate authentication
Investigate and verify
Project adaptation: use the evidence workflow, then request investigate_risk with DASF-R-9.12. 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 | AML.TA0004: Initial Access<br>AML.T0054: LLM Jailbreak |
| MITRE ATTACK as of Q3 2024 | ID: T1134.001 Token Impersonation/Theft <br>ID: T1087 Account Discovery<br>ID: T1098 Account Manipulation<br>ID: T1110 Brute Force<br>ID: T1528 Steal Application Access Token |
| OWASP LLM Top 10 2025 | LLM01: Prompt Injection |
| OWASP ML Top 10 v0.3 | no mapping |
| OWASP Agentic AI – Threats and Mitigations | no mapping |
| NIST - 800- 53 - Rev 5 | AC-2:Account Management,<br>AC-3:Access Enforcement,<br>AC-6:Least Privilege,<br>SI-4:System Monitoring, <br>SI-10:Information Input Validation, <br>SA-9:External System Services, <br>CM:Configuration Management Family, <br>SC-7:Boundary Protection, <br>SC-32:System Partitioning, <br>SC-39:Process Isolation |
| NIST 800-53 Controls Mapping Rationale | Protects LLM endpoints against jailbreak attacks through input validation and access controls. |
| HITRUST | no mapping |
| ENISA’s Securing ML Algorithms | Ensure ML applications comply with identity management, authentication, and access control policies.<br>Control all data used by the ML model".<br>Ensure ML applications comply with data security requirements.<br>Include ML applications into detection and response to security incident processes.<br>Define and monitor indicators for proper functioning of the model. |
| ISO 42001:2023 Controls Objectives and Controls (Annex A) | A.9 Use of AI systems<br>A.9.2 Processes for responsible use of AI systems<br>A.9.3 Objectives for responsible use of AI system<br>A.9.4 Intended use of the AI system<br>A.6.2.6 AI system operation and monitoring<br>A.6.2.8 AI system recording of event logs |
| ISO 27001:2022 Information Security Control Reference (Annex A) | A.5.16 Identity management<br>A.8.5 Secure authentication<br>A.5.18 Access rights<br>A.8.20 Networks Security<br>A.8.21 Security of network services<br>A.8.22 Segregation of networks<br>A.5.15 Access control<br>A.8.2 Privileged access rights<br>A.8.3 Information access restriction<br>A.8.4 Access to source code<br>A.8.20 Networks security<br>A.8.24 Use of cryptography<br>A.8.5 Secure Authentication<br>A.8.15 Logging<br>A.8.16 Monitoring Activities |
| EU AI Act | no mapping |
| CSA MCP Security | (blank in source) |
| OWASP MCP TOP 10 | (blank in source) |