AIGP - Understanding how to govern AI development - Section 3.6

Conduct continuous monitoring, periodic audits, red teaming and security testing of deployed AI systems, and manage and document incidents, issues and risks including model and data drift.

Conduct continuous monitoring, periodic audits, and red teaming on deployed AI systems to detect model drift, data drift, and emerging security risks. Manage and document incidents and issues according to a defined response process.

AI model monitoringred teamingmodel driftdata drift

Practice question for this objective

Free sampleUnderstanding how to govern AI developmenthard

Security testing of a deployed image-classification model focuses on one specific threat: an attacker who, at inference time, adds small perturbations to a submitted image that are imperceptible to a person yet cause the model to output the wrong label. The team wants the test procedure that directly probes resilience to this threat. Which testing approach targets it most precisely?

  • AInjecting mislabelled or corrupted records into the training corpus and observing how the retrained model behaves afterwards.
  • BIssuing many crafted queries to reconstruct the model's parameters or training data, then checking what an attacker could recover.
  • CReplaying historical production traffic at high volume to confirm the serving system keeps responding under heavy load.
  • DGenerating adversarial examples through small, targeted perturbations of inputs and measuring how often they flip the model's predictions. Correct
Match an inference-time evasion threat to adversarial-example testing, distinguishing it from data poisoning, model extraction, and load testing. The threat described is an evasion attack, where carefully perturbed inputs cause misclassification at inference time, so the precise test is to generate adversarial examples and measure how often they change the prediction; poisoning targets training data, extraction targets confidentiality, and load testing targets availability, none of which probe this specific weakness.

Why A is wrong: This describes a data-poisoning test, which is a real security concern but attacks the training stage, so it does not probe the inference-time perturbation threat in question.

Why B is wrong: Model-extraction and membership-inference testing addresses confidentiality, which is plausible under a security heading, but it targets information leakage rather than perturbation-induced misclassification.

Why C is wrong: Load and stress testing checks availability and performance, so it is tempting as a robustness measure, yet it does nothing to assess whether perturbed inputs can fool the classifier.

Why D is correct: Crafting perturbed inputs and measuring induced misclassification is the direct test for evasion attacks at inference time, which is exactly the threat described.

See more AIGP practice questions, answers explained.

More in this domain

Back to all Understanding how to govern AI development objectives, or the AIGP cert hub.

Examworthy is not affiliated with or endorsed by IAPP. Original, blueprint-aligned practice material only.