Skip to content
Free tool · ISO/IEC 27090

AI Shared-Responsibility Matrix

Who secures what depends on how you use AI. For each ISO/IEC 27090 threat theme, this matrix shows whether the provider, you, or both typically do the work across five deployment models: an LLM API, a managed model platform, a self-hosted open-weights model, an AI feature inside a SaaS product and an in-house trained model. Pick yours and get your checklist and the questions to ask each provider.

Free, in your browser, nothing uploaded. Typical splits only: confirm each line with your provider. Sending the questions out? Use the AI Supplier Questionnaire (Pro).

No download, no card

Typical split only. Who does what depends on your contract, plan and configuration, and providers differ. Confirm each line with the provider in writing. No provider is named here and none is described.

1. Which ways do you use AI?

Pick every deployment model you have. Most organisations have more than one.

2. Who typically does what

ProviderSharedCustomer

Tap a row to see what each side does for every model you picked.

Threat themeLLM APIAI SaaS feature
SharedProvider
SharedProvider
ProviderProvider
ProviderProvider
ProviderProvider
ProviderProvider
SharedShared
CustomerProvider
CustomerShared
SharedProvider
SharedShared

LLM API: you lead on 2, share 5, provider leads on 4 of 11 themes.

AI SaaS feature: you lead on 0, share 3, provider leads on 8 of 11 themes.

3. Your responsibilities

“Provider” here means the model API provider. Tick items as you put them in place; ticks stay in this browser.

Questions to ask the provider

  • Prompt injection (direct and indirect): How do you test the model or feature against direct and indirect prompt injection, and can we see a summary of the results?
  • Prompt injection (direct and indirect): Which guardrail or filtering features exist, are they on by default, and what do they not cover?
  • Data and model poisoning: How do you check the integrity and provenance of the data the model is trained and tuned on?
  • Data and model poisoning: Is our data ever used to train or tune models other customers use, and can we opt out?
  • Evasion and adversarial examples: How do you evaluate the model against adversarial or unusual inputs before each release?
  • Evasion and adversarial examples: How are we told when a model update changes behaviour?
  • Model theft and extraction: How are model weights and our fine-tuned versions protected from unauthorised access or extraction?
  • Model theft and extraction: What access logs can we get for our endpoints and keys?
  • Model inversion and data reconstruction: Does the API or feature return confidence scores, log probabilities or embeddings, and can we turn them off?
  • Membership inference: What privacy protections apply to training data, and has anyone measured how much of it can be inferred?
  • Supply chain and model provenance: Which third-party models, datasets and sub-processors does the service depend on, and how are we told about changes?
  • Supply chain and model provenance: Can you provide provenance details or an AI bill of materials for the model?
  • Denial of wallet and resource abuse: What usage limits, spend caps and alerts can we set, per user and per account?
  • Sensitive data leakage: How long are prompts, responses and logs kept, who can access them, and where are they stored?
  • Sensitive data leakage: How does the feature respect each user's existing permissions when it answers?
Turn these into a full supplier questionnaire with scoring (Pro)
TL;DR

What this matrix does

4 points
  • An AI shared-responsibility matrix shows, for each AI threat, which parts the provider handles, which parts you handle, and which you share.
  • Rows are the ISO/IEC 27090 threat themes (prompt injection, poisoning, evasion, extraction, inversion, membership inference, supply chain, output handling, excessive agency, resource abuse and data leakage). Columns are five deployment models: LLM API, managed model platform, self-hosted open weights, AI feature inside a SaaS product, and in-house trained model.
  • Pick the models you use and get a checklist of your responsibilities, plus the questions to put to each provider where they lead or share.
  • It shows the typical split, not any named vendor's terms. Export to CSV or Markdown. Free, in your browser.

Why the split moves with the deployment model

The further you are from the model, the more the provider does and the more your job becomes checking their work. An AI feature in a SaaS product leaves you mostly with choices about data, connectors and permissions. An LLM API leaves the model to the provider but everything around it, from prompt assembly to what the output can trigger, to you. With open weights or an in-house model, the provider’s part shrinks to hosting.

Two themes stay yours in almost every model: what you do with the output, and what you let the model act on. Two are nearly always shared: supply chain and data leakage, because both sides hold part of the data and part of the dependency tree. Gaps appear where each side assumes the other has it covered, so write the split down and get the provider to confirm it.

Frequently asked questions

What is the AI shared responsibility model?

It is the AI version of the cloud shared responsibility model: a split of security work between the organisation that supplies the model or platform and the organisation that uses it. The split moves with the deployment model. With an AI feature inside a SaaS product the vendor does most of the work; with a self-hosted open-weights model or an in-house model almost all of it is yours.

Who is responsible for prompt injection when we use an LLM API?

Typically it is shared. The API provider trains the model to resist manipulation and may offer optional safety features, but only you can separate instructions from untrusted content in your app, filter what it retrieves and limit what the model can trigger. Most real prompt-injection damage happens in the application layer, which is yours.

Does this tell me what a specific vendor does?

No. The matrix gives the typical split for each deployment model and names no vendors. Providers differ, and the same provider can differ by plan and configuration. Use the questions in the tool, or the AI supplier questionnaire, to get each provider's answer in writing.

How does this relate to ISO/IEC 27090?

ISO/IEC 27090 is guidance on addressing security threats to AI systems, and those threats do not stop at your boundary. The matrix uses the same threat themes as the PlayCISO 27090 tools, described in our own words, so you can see which ones you must handle yourself and which you must check a supplier handles. ISO/IEC 27090 cannot be certified; the matrix is supporting evidence inside an ISO/IEC 27001 or 42001 management system.

Where is my data stored?

Your picks and ticks are kept only in this browser's local storage. Nothing is sent to PlayCISO. Export to CSV or Markdown to keep or share a copy.

The tools people use most on PlayCISO.

All tools
🖤 Black Friday: new customers get 3 months of Pro for $5, then $5/month. Ends 30 Nov. Claim 3 months for $5 →