EU AI Act
EU AI Act - High-Risk Operator Obligations

EU AI Act EUAI-Art.26: Obligations of deployers of high-risk AI systems

Deployers shall use high-risk AI systems in accordance with the IFU; assign human oversight to appropriately competent natural persons; ensure input data is relevant and sufficiently representative; monitor operation and inform the provider of risks/incidents; retain automatically generated logs for at least 6 months (longer where required); inform workers/representatives where used in the workplace; carry out a DPIA where required under GDPR; and where a deployer is a public authority, register the system in the EU database.

Maintained by Gerard BlokdykVerified against the published standard Control text last updated

What else in your programme already covers this

This control maps to 26 controls across 7 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 · 8 controls

  • A.2.3 Alignment with other organizational policies
  • A.3.2 AI roles and responsibilities
  • A.4.6 Human resources
  • A.6.2.6 AI system operation and monitoring
  • A.6.2.8 AI system recording of event logs
  • A.9.2 Processes for responsible use of AI systems
  • A.9.3 Objectives for responsible use of AI system
  • A.9.4 Intended use of the AI system

NIST SP 800-53 Rev 5 · 6 controls

NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) · 4 controls

  • AIRMF-MN-3.1 AI risks and benefits from third-party resources are regularly monitored, and risk controls are applied and documented
  • AIRMF-MP-3.4 Processes for operator and practitioner proficiency with AI system performance and trustworthiness, and relevant technical standards and certifications, are defined, assessed and documented
  • AIRMF-MS-2.10 Privacy risk of the AI system as identified in the MAP function is examined and documented
  • AIRMF-MS-2.4 The functionality and behavior of the AI system and its components, as identified in the MAP function, are monitored when in production

ISO 27001:2022 · 3 controls

  • 5.10 Acceptable use of information and other associated assets
  • 5.34 Privacy and protection of personal identifiable information (PII)
  • 8.16 Monitoring activities

Cloud Security Alliance Cloud Controls Matrix (CCM) v4.0.1 · 2 controls

SOC 2 · 2 controls

  • SOC2-CC1.4 CC1.4 Attracting, developing and retaining competent people (COSO principle 4)
  • SOC2-PI1.2 PI1.2 Controls over system inputs

GDPR · 1 control

Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.

Other controls in EU AI Act - High-Risk Operator Obligations

You are reading one control. How much of EU AI Act have you already done?

EU AI Act EUAI-Art.26 is one control. If you already hold one of the frameworks below, a reviewed crosswalk already says how much of EU AI Act your existing evidence covers. Hold ISO/IEC 42001:2023 and 17 of 43 EU AI Act controls already carry evidence.

If you hold ISO/IEC 42001:202339.5% covered · 26 gapsIf you hold NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)25.6% covered · 32 gaps

Each report names every control your existing framework evidences, every one it does not, the reasoning behind each claim, and the claims that were argued against and rejected. 0 were rejected on the ISO/IEC 42001:2023 pair alone.

See the released pairs, $299 eachBrowse the graph free

Query this from an agent

The graph holds this control, the 26 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.

MCP endpointAll EU AI Act controls