AI Red Team · Module 6 · Respond

Incident Reporting, Communication and Mitigation

The lesson covers RS.CO Incident Response Reporting and Communication and RS.MI Incident Mitigation. Participants map one incident to the triggers and clocks of NIS 2, DORA, the AI Act and the GDPR from a single record, design AI-assisted drafting with real sign-off and no submission rights, define a containment catalogue by autonomy level for a Mode 5 agent, and plan eradication as a verified rebuild that remains a human decision.

Lesson 21 of 28Chapter 2190 minutes

Read the chapterThe whitepaperThe slides

All courses / AI Red Team / Module 6 / Chapter 21

Learning objectives

After the lesson the participant can:

Key concepts

Four regimes, four triggers
NIS 2 runs from awareness of a significant incident, with an early warning within 24 hours and a notification within 72; DORA from classification as major; the AI Act from a causal link or its reasonable likelihood, not later than 15 days after awareness; the GDPR within 72 hours of awareness where feasible.
The record as single source
The incident record carries the classification facts, and recording a fact starts the clocks that depend on it. A clock starts on the earliest plausible trigger, each time limit names its source article or standard, and every report is attached to the record version it was based on.
Draft from the record, sign by a person
The drafter works from structured, analyst-confirmed facts; raw artefacts reach it only as quoted, labelled evidence. The tool shows each statement beside its source fact and marks unsourced ones, and a named signatory approves, edits or rejects.
Containment catalogue
A short, reviewed list of containment actions, each with autonomy level, scope limits, reversal and evidence. Irreversible actions, actions on tier-0 assets and changes to the agent's own permissions are never catalogued, and Level 4 Autonomous is not used for containment.
Rebuild rather than clean
Eradication redeploys compromised components from known-good definitions. For AI systems that means restoring model artefacts, prompts, guardrail policies and retrieval indexes at a version that predates the compromise and re-running the evaluation suite. It is complete when verified, not when executed.

Interactive exercises

Do them here and get feedback at once. Choose a card and then where it belongs, or drag it.

Interactive exercise 1 · Sort

What may be in the containment catalogue

Sort each action by its place in a containment catalogue, following the chapter's rules.

Interactive exercise 2 · Put in order

The NIS 2 reporting sequence

Put the stages of reporting a significant incident under NIS 2 Article 23(4) in order, as the chapter describes them.

Teaching plan

20 minThe teacher walks through the four regimes with trigger, recipient and sequence, and the precedence of DORA under NIS 2 Article 4 where requirements are at least equivalent.
15 minRead the clock configuration for INC-HM-2027-0412, including the hold before altering the AI system under Article 73(6) and the drafter without submission rights.
15 minReview the containment catalogue of HM-SEC-001 and the controls on the containing agent; contrast containment with eradication.
30 minExercise: groups map a multi-regime incident to its clocks and write a containment catalogue for the responding agent.
10 minGroups reconcile two draft reports for the same incident and explain every difference by a fact in the record.

Discussion

  1. In a regulatory report an invented detail is worse than a gap. How should a drafting tool and a signatory handle what is not yet known?
  2. An unconfirmed isolation is lifted after a fixed time in Hansa Mutual's catalogue. For which asset classes would you keep the isolation instead, and who should decide?
  3. Why is an incomplete eradication dangerous in a way an incomplete containment is not?

Written exercise

Exercise · 30 minutes

Map one incident to its clocks and bound the containment

Scenario with synthetic facts: a stolen service-account credential lets an intruder read personal data in two entities, degrade a service and access the data store behind a high-risk AI system. Part one: answer the four classification questions, recording unknown where you do not know, and for each applicable regime write a clock entry with instrument and article, trigger, time limit or its source, entities and signatory; state when each clock may be closed. Part two: write a containment catalogue for the responding agent: stop path and holder, budget per incident and per hour with the fall-back on exhaustion, exclusions, and four actions with level, reversal and approver where needed. State which eradication steps stay with the incident commander.

Deliverable: A reporting-clock configuration with one entry per regime and a containment catalogue with budget, exclusions, levelled actions and stop path.

Self-test

Choose an answer to see whether it is right, or open the answer below each question.

  1. From which event does the DORA reporting clock for a major ICT-related incident start, as the chapter describes it?

    Show the answer

    A. From classification of the incident as major
    The chapter states that the DORA clock starts from classification as major, so classification must be fast and recorded, while the NIS 2 clock starts from awareness.

  2. What does the flag hold_before_altering_system in Hansa Mutual's configuration reflect?

    Show the answer

    C. AI Act Article 73(6): no alteration that may affect later evaluation of the causes before the authorities are informed
    The flag reflects Article 73(6) of the AI Act. For the same reason, suspending a compromised AI system preserves the model version, configuration and data.

  3. What happens when HM-SEC-001 exhausts its action budget during an incident?

    Show the answer

    D. Further actions fall back to Level 2 Supervised
    The catalogue caps actions per incident and per hour, and on exhaustion actions fall back to Level 2 Supervised, where a person approves each one.