Claim · 2025-09-15 · publication · Stated in source · Supported

Among technical countermeasures to model and algorithm risks, the AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0 lists strengthening the assessment of how security flaws (安全缺陷) in foundation models and open-source models are passed on.

One recorded claim. The claim panel gives its qualification, the source passages with their place in each source, and how it was checked.

What it connects

AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0 (人工智能安全治理框架2.0) → states provision → Strengthen assessment of how security flaws in foundation and open-source models are passed on

Where it appears

No collection page holds this claim. It is listed with its records in the explorer.

Claim and evidence

AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0 (人工智能安全治理框架2.0)states provision ↓Strengthen assessment of how security flaws in foundation and open-source models are passed on

Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editorStated in sourceSupported

Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source

Provision: Required action · provision ID open-source-flaw-propagation
Subject version: 2.0 · Published 2025-09-15 · Effective date not established
Date: 2025-09-15 · publication Records dated 2025 →

Scope and limitsWhat the cited edition says, as guidance in a technical document of TC260 (a national standardisation technical committee); it is not evidence that any developer adopted, implemented or was required to follow it. 开源 is rendered "open-source" as the text uses it, without any judgement of licence status.

The evidence 01

primary sourceSupports the claim

人工智能安全治理框架2.0

全国网络安全标准化技术委员会 · 2025-09 · In Simplified Chinese (zh-Hans)

Archived copy, captured 2026-03-02: 人工智能安全治理框架2.0

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“加强基础模型、 … 开源模型安全缺陷传导评估”

Location in source §4.1.1 (d)

How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher

Machine-checked · 2026-10-31

Source details and check notes

Authors: 全国网络安全标准化技术委员会; 国家计算机网络应急技术处理协调中心
Version: Dated document, retrieved on 2026-10-27 (SHA-256 50735b9ca01bff746169fa58e554abb97b4e62c27d4c97afd64f18ff83bba705) directly from the publisher. Version: 1759653474200838.pdf. Bilingual PDF (Chinese text followed by the publisher’s English text) linked from the CAC news item of 15 September 2025. Quotes are from the Chinese text, transcribed as printed: the text layer contains control characters (U+0001) and compatibility forms (Kangxi radicals, ⻛ for 风, ⻅ for 见), which are normalised in the quotations. No copy on tc260.org.cn was located. English title (machine translation): “AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0”. Publisher as printed on the inspected expression: 全国网络安全标准化技术委员会 (hosted by the Cyberspace Administration of China, cac.gov.cn).
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-10-27
Language: Simplified Chinese (zh-Hans)
Archive copy: Open archived copy, captured 2026-03-02: 人工智能安全治理框架2.0. An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2026-03-02. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-10-27.
Attribution: 全国网络安全标准化技术委员会, 国家计算机网络应急技术处理协调中心, “人工智能安全治理框架2.0”, 2025-09.
Reuse: No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution.
Check notes: Candidate pack passage, Chinese frontier-AI institutions, third collection (research/china-labs-3). The quotation (18 words, each CJK character counted as one) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 and again in a fresh retrieval the same day, read directly from the publisher. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. Elided quotation: the ellipses mark omitted words, so the passage is not continuous in the source. English machine translation, not verified by a person: “strengthen assessment of the transmission of security flaws in foundation models and open-source models”. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item K087) re-read the record’s sources directly and found full support. No human editorial review.

Status and meaning

Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor. An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.

Relation. An exact framework edition, or another document with an exact expression, states one provision: a capability threshold or risk level and its trigger, a required safeguard or action, a decision authority (who decides, recommends, can overrule or is informed), a stated exception, or another statement of its content, such as a licence term or a prospectus statement. The passage records what the document says, not implementation, compliance or effectiveness. Provisions with the same key align across editions of one family.

Date. Release date of the cited edition, as the dataset records it; the provision states no effective date.

Record ID c3-governance-tc260-asgf-v2-open-source-flaw-propagation