Sari la conținut

localeBeta.label localeBeta.notice localeBeta.readInEnglish

perspectiva aiqbenchSiguranță AI

analiza aiqbench

This paper proposes a comprehensive lifecycle model for Large Language Models that explicitly integrates security analysis into every stage of development and operations, addressing the current gap where frameworks prioritize efficiency over risk mitigation. By mapping regulatory requirements like NIST AI RMF and the EU AI Act to specific pipeline layers such as data selection and alignment strategy, it highlights how critical decisions made during low-visibility development phases often carry higher consequences than deployment-facing stages. The model's 32 distinct stages offer a structured approach for verifying data provenance, managing agentic permissions, and ensuring secure decommissioning in enterprise workflows.
Sursă care acoperăarXiv
Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

A Security-Oriented Lifecycle Model for Large Language Model Systems

arXiv3 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2608.03626v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are being integrated into critical infrastructure and enterprise workflows at unprecedented scale,yet the lifecycle frameworks governing their development and operations were designed for operational efficiency rather than security analysis. As a result, security-relevant activities such as data provenance verification, artifact signing, agentic permission control, and decommissioning are often left implicit or assumed to receive due care. Governance frameworks, in turn, organise requirements around risk levels or management processes without clearly linking them to the lifecycle stages where they apply. This paper addresses both deficiencies. We propose a lifecycle model for LLM systems that supports security analysis by structuring it around security-relevant boundaries rather than workflow optimisation. The model comprises 32 stages across four core pipeline layers (Data, Model, Distribution, Application), supported by a 12-stage LLMOps pillar and a 9-category governance pillar. Thirteen stages are introduced here as separate units because they expose distinct security concerns that existing frameworks do not clearly distinguish. A governance mapping synthesising the NIST AI RMF, the EU AI Act, and ISO/IEC 42001 reveals a structural property of the current regulatory landscape: governance evidence concentrates at deployment-facing stages, where systems are visible to regulators, while the most consequential decisions, data selection, alignment strategy, and capability boundaries, are made at development-facing stages, where regulatory visibility is lowest.

arXiv:2608.03626 (cs)

Abstract:Large language models are being integrated into critical infrastructure and enterprise workflows at unprecedented scale,yet the lifecycle frameworks governing their development and operations were designed for operational efficiency rather than security analysis. As a result, security-relevant activities such as data provenance verification, artifact signing, agentic permission control, and decommissioning are often left implicit or assumed to receive due care. Governance frameworks, in turn, organise requirements around risk levels or management processes without clearly linking them to the lifecycle stages where they apply. This paper addresses both deficiencies. We propose a lifecycle model for LLM systems that supports security analysis by structuring it around security-relevant boundaries rather than workflow optimisation. The model comprises 32 stages across four core pipeline layers (Data, Model, Distribution, Application), supported by a 12-stage LLMOps pillar and a 9-category governance pillar. Thirteen stages are introduced here as separate units because they expose distinct security concerns that existing frameworks do not clearly distinguish. A governance mapping synthesising the NIST AI RMF, the EU AI Act, and ISO/IEC 42001 reveals a structural property of the current regulatory landscape: governance evidence concentrates at deployment-facing stages, where systems are visible to regulators, while the most consequential decisions, data selection, alignment strategy, and capability boundaries, are made at development-facing stages, where regulatory visibility is lowest.

Accepted as: Batzolis, E., Drosatos, G., Katsouros, V., & Rantos, K. (2026). A Security-Oriented Lifecycle Model for Large Language Model Systems. In: Kieseberg, P., Skopik, F., Atli, B., Schrittwieser, S., & Asplund, M. (Eds.), Availability, reliability and security---ARES 2026 EU Projects Symposium workshops (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 1-18). Springer Nature Switzerland

Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY)

K.6.5; D.2.9; I.2; K.4.1

arXiv:2608.03626 [cs.CR]

(or arXiv:2608.03626v1 [cs.CR] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.03626 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 370 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe