Free RAID-AI Framework Helps Agencies Assess Ransomware Resilience in AI Systems

Published on October 30, 2026, the Ransomware Assessment and Incident Defense Framework for AI Systems (RAID-AI) gives cybersecurity teams a free, hands-on way to assess ransomware readiness in AI environments. Developed over two years by Behnaz Karimi and Yuvaraj Govindarajulu, co-leads of the OWASP AI Bill of Materials (AIBOM) initiative, the framework is available online. Its intended users include chief information security officers, cybersecurity officers, and security engineers. Rather than connecting to or scanning systems, RAID-AI asks users to review their own controls and select maturity levels manually, on a scale from zero to five.

The framework covers both general cybersecurity measures and AI-specific risks involving models, data, tools, runtime environments, and supporting infrastructure. General control areas include recovery, training, and sensitive-data protection. Controls are grouped by maturity, with levels described as basic, advanced, and high. RAID-AI maps its controls to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 (CSF 2.0) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Cybersecurity Performance Goals 2.0 (CPG 2.0). Users can also map adversarial attacks against MITRE ATT&CK, MITRE ATLAS, and NIST Adversarial frameworks. This gives agencies and contractors a reference for connecting AI-focused ransomware reviews to broader cybersecurity practices, while leaving implementation and risk decisions with each organization.

The procurement signal is prospective rather than an active buying opportunity. RAID-AI is free, and the source identifies no solicitation, contract award, funding, or mandatory federal requirement. Procurement teams may use its control categories as a reference when evaluating ransomware resilience in AI systems, but the framework’s availability does not itself establish a compliance obligation. For contractors, the control mapping may help shape AI-security assessment, remediation-planning, recovery-readiness, training, and implementation-support offerings. Businesses should monitor whether agencies later incorporate comparable controls into requirements or evaluation criteria rather than treating the framework’s release as a bid notice.

The framework addresses a threat area that its developers say is beginning to emerge. Karimi stated, “Right now, we are slowly seeing that ransomware attacks targeting AI systems are happening.” The source cites an April 2025 report by Zoran Mitrovic, identified as engineering lead at Kintra Health, describing ransomware actors using data-poisoning techniques. It also references an alleged June 2026 cyberattack on pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk, in which hackers claimed to have stolen AI models. These examples are reported as context for the risk, not as evidence of a federal procurement action. RAID-AI is accompanied by documentation explaining how to use the tool, how it was developed, and how maturity levels and security scores are calculated.

• RAID-AI is a free, online, manual self-assessment; it does not connect to or scan an organization’s systems.
• Users assess controls on a zero-to-five maturity scale, with categories including basic, advanced, and high.
• General controls include recovery, training, and sensitive-data protection; AI-specific areas include data, tools, and runtime.
• Control mapping references NIST CSF 2.0 and CISA CPG 2.0, both voluntary frameworks in this context.
• Attack mapping options include MITRE ATT&CK, MITRE ATLAS, and NIST Adversarial.
• Developers Behnaz Karimi and Yuvaraj Govindarajulu spent two years developing the framework through their work with the OWASP AIBOM initiative.
• The source cites an April 2025 report on ransomware actors using data-poisoning techniques and an alleged June 2026 attack involving claims of stolen AI models at Novo Nordisk.
• No solicitation, award, funding, or mandatory requirement is announced; contractors can treat the framework as a reference for potential assessment and remediation services, not an active bid.
• Documentation covers tool use, development, maturity levels, and security-score calculations, which may help organizations make assessments more repeatable.