PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 2022 Lead Auditor exam Exam Practice Test

Risk modification involves implementing controls to reduce the likelihood or impact of a risk. By replacing FTP with SSH, Knight has modified the risk associated with the transfer of files by ensuring that the data is encrypted, thereby reducing the likelihood of unauthorized access through traffic capturing1. References: = This answer is based on the standard risk treatment options provided in ISO/IEC 27001, which include avoiding, modifying, sharing, or retaining risks as part of the risk management process

The three audit findings that would prompt you to raise a nonconformity report are:

•The organisation is treating information security risks in the order in which they are identified

•The organisation’s risk assessment criteria have not been reviewed and approved by top management

•The organisation’s information security risk assessment process is based solely on an assessment of the impact of each risk

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.2, the organisation must establish and maintain an information security risk management process that is consistent with the organisation’s context and aligned with its overall risk management approach1. This process must include the following steps:

•Establishing the risk assessment criteria, which must be approved by top management and reflect the organisation’s risk appetite and objectives2

•Identifying the information security risks, which must consider the assets, threats, vulnerabilities, impacts, and likelihoods3

•Analysing the information security risks, which must determine the levels of risk and compare them with the risk criteria4

•Evaluating the information security risks, which must prioritise the risks and decide whether they need treatment or not5

Therefore, the audit findings B, E, and F indicate that the organisation is not following the required steps of the information security risk management process, and thus are nonconformities with the standard.

The other audit findings are not necessarily nonconformities, as they may be acceptable depending on the organisation’s context and justification. For example:

•Audit finding A may be acceptable if the organisation has identified and treated the additional information security risks that are relevant to its scope and objectives, and has documented the rationale for doing so6

•Audit finding C may be acceptable if the organisation has assigned clear roles and responsibilities for the information security risk management process, and has ensured that the risk owners have the authority and competence to manage the risks7

•Audit finding D may be acceptable if the organisation has defined and communicated the meaning and implications of the emoji-based risk classification, and has ensured that it is consistent with the risk criteria and the risk treatment process8

•Audit finding G may be acceptable if the organisation has justified the use of discrete values for the probability of the information security risks, and has ensured that they are realistic and consistent with the risk criteria and the risk analysis method9

•Audit finding H may be acceptable if the organisation has established and maintained different systems for assessing operational and strategic information security risks, and has ensured that they are integrated and aligned with the overall risk management approach and the ISMS objectives10

References: 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2; 2: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 a); 3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 b); 4: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 c); 5: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 d); 6: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.0.2; 7: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 5.3; 8: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 a) 2); 9: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 c) 2); 10: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2 a) 1); : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022

Internal audits and external audits are integral components of the certification cycle, ensuring regular monitoring of the management system. Internal audits help organizations prepare for external audits by identifying and addressing potential nonconformities, while external audits validate the compliance of the management system with ISO/IEC 27001 standards.

References: PECB ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Course Material; ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clauses 9.2 (Internal audit) and 9.3 (Management review)

The following statements are true:

• The role of a certification body auditor involves evaluating the organization’s processes for ensuring compliance with their legal requirements. This is part of the auditor’s responsibility to assess the effectiveness and conformity of the organization’s ISMS against the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard and the applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
• During a third-party audit, the auditor evaluates how the organization ensures that they are made aware of changes to the legal requirements. This is part of the auditor’s responsibility to verify that the organization has established and maintained a process for identifying and updating their legal and other requirements related to information security. The following statement is false:
• As part of a certification body audit, the auditor is responsible for verifying the organization’s legal compliance status. This is not true, as the auditor is not authorized or qualified to provide legal advice or judgment on the organization’s compliance status. The auditor can only report on the evidence of compliance or noncompliance observed during the audit, but the ultimate responsibility for ensuring legal compliance lies with the organization. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 66. : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 67. : ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB, page 22.

Even though the marketing department was not included in the audit scope, the issue of employees' access rights control must be communicated to Sinvestment's representatives and included in the audit report because it is part of Sinvestment’s information security policy. It reflects on the overall adherence to the ISMS requirements.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause 9.2 (Internal audit)

• B. 8.12 Data leakage protection. This is true because the auditee should have implemented measures to prevent unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information, such as personal data, medical records, or official documents, that are contained in the parcels. Data leakage protection could include encryption, authentication, access control, logging, and monitoring of data transfers12.
• D. 6.3 Information security awareness, education, and training. This is true because the auditee should have ensured that all employees and contractors involved in the shipping process are aware of the information security policies and procedures, and have received appropriate training on how to handle and protect the information assets in their custody. Information security awareness, education, and training could include induction programmes, periodic refreshers, awareness campaigns, e-learning modules, and feedback mechanisms13.
• E. 7.10 Storage media. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to protect the storage media that contain information assets from unauthorized access, misuse, theft, loss, or damage. Storage media could include paper documents, optical disks, magnetic tapes, flash drives, or hard disks14. Storage media controls could include physical locks, encryption, backup, disposal, or destruction14.
• F. 8.3 Information access restriction. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to restrict access to information assets based on the principle of least privilege and the need-to-know basis. Information access restriction could include identification, authentication, authorization, accountability, and auditability of users and systems that access information assets15.
• I. 7.4 Physical security monitoring. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to monitor the physical security of the premises where information assets are stored or processed. Physical security monitoring could include CCTV cameras, alarms, sensors, guards, or patrols16. Physical security monitoring could help detect and deter unauthorized physical access or intrusion attempts16.
• J. 5.13 Labelling of information. This is true because the auditee should have implemented controls to label information assets according to their classification level and handling instructions. Labelling of information could include markings, tags, stamps, stickers, or barcodes1 . Labelling of information could help identify and protect information assets from unauthorized disclosure or misuse1 .

References :=

• ISO/IEC 27002:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Code of practice for information security controls
• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements
• ISO/IEC 27003:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Guidance
• ISO/IEC 27004:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Monitoring measurement analysis and evaluation
• ISO/IEC 27005:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security risk management
• ISO/IEC 27006:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems
• [ISO/IEC 27007:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Guidelines for information security management systems auditing]

The four controls from the list that the auditor in training should review are:

•A. Confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements: This control requires the organisation to ensure that all employees, contractors, and third parties who have access to sensitive information sign appropriate agreements that oblige them to protect the confidentiality and integrity of such information. This is especially important for an organisation that stores data on behalf of external clients, as it demonstrates its commitment to safeguarding their information assets and complying with their contractual obligations.

•C. Information security awareness, education and training: This control requires the organisation to provide regular and relevant information security awareness, education and training to all employees, contractors, and third parties who have access to the organisation’s information systems and information assets. This is essential for ensuring that they are aware of their roles and responsibilities, the information security policies and procedures, the potential threats and risks, and the best practices for preventing and responding to information security incidents.

•D. Remote working arrangements: This control requires the organisation to establish and implement policies and procedures for managing the information security risks associated with remote working arrangements, such as teleworking, mobile working, or working from home. This includes defining the conditions and requirements for remote working, such as the authorised devices, applications, and networks, the encryption and authentication methods, the backup and recovery procedures, and the reporting and monitoring mechanisms. This is important for an organisation that stores data on behalf of external clients, as it ensures that the information security level is maintained regardless of the location of the workers and the devices they use.

•E. The conducting of verification checks on personnel: This control requires the organisation to conduct appropriate verification checks on the background, qualifications, and references of all employees, contractors, and third parties who have access to the organisation’s information systems and information assets. This is necessary for verifying their identity, suitability, and trustworthiness, and for preventing the hiring of unauthorised or malicious individuals who could compromise the information security of the organisation and its clients.

References: = ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Annex A, clauses A.5.7, A.7.2, A.7.3, and A.7.4; ISO 27001 People Controls: How personnel ensures information security; What are the 11 new security controls in ISO 27001:2022? - Advisera.

Yes, assessing the ISMS as a whole can be acceptable if the audit team obtains reasonable assurance that the system conforms to the standard requirements. The approach taken by the audit team must still ensure that all significant aspects of the ISMS are evaluated adequately, and if this is achieved through a holistic assessment, it is considered sufficient.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, an audit programme is a set of one or more audits planned for a specific time frame and directed towards a specific purpose1. The individual(s) managing the audit programme are responsible for establishing, implementing and maintaining the audit programme in accordance with the organization’s policies and objectives1. This includes defining the extent of the audit programme based on strategic direction, risks and opportunities; establishing the audit programme by defining its objectives, scope and criteria; determining the resources necessary for the audit programme; selecting competent auditors and assigning them to appropriate audits; defining the objectives, scope and criteria for each individual audit; defining the plan of each individual audit; retaining documented information of the audit results; reviewing and improving the performance of the audit programme1. Therefore, these six actions are part of the responsibilities of the individual(s) managing the audit programme. The other option, communicating with the auditee during the audit, is not a responsibility of the individual(s) managing the audit programme, but rather a responsibility of the audit team leader1. References: ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems

A legal technical expert (LTE) is a person who provides specific knowledge or expertise related to the legal aspects of the information security management system (ISMS) during a certification audit. The LTE is not an auditor, but a member of the audit team who supports the auditors in collecting and evaluating the audit evidence. The LTE is not responsible for evaluating the auditee’s legal knowledge, criticising the organisation’s legal compliance issues, or debating complex legal points with the auditee, as these tasks may be beyond the scope of the audit, or may compromise the objectivity and impartiality of the audit. The LTE is responsible for advising on legal checkpoints for the audit team, such as the applicable legal, regulatory, and contractual requirements, the relevant sources of information, the methods of verification, and the criteria of evaluation. The LTE is also responsible for verifying the legal status of the organisation, such as the registration, licensing, authorisation, or accreditation of the organisation, and the compliance with the relevant laws and regulations. References:

• What is the role of a technical expert in ISO audit?
• Roles, Responsibilities & Authorities for ISO 27001 5.3
• Guide to Become an ISO 27001 Lead Auditor

The responsibilities described fit those of a "guide." A guide in an audit context is typically someone from the auditee's organization who facilitates audit activities, manages logistics, ensures compliance with health and safety policies, and may also witness the audit process, assisting the audit team.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

Based on the provided scenario, the auditors’ request for documentary evidence regarding the monitoring process of outsourced operations indicates that the auditors demonstrated professional skepticism. This is because professional skepticism involves a critical assessment of audit evidence and includes a questioning mind and a careful evaluation of the information provided by the auditee123.

Professional skepticism is an essential part of the auditing process, especially in the context of ISO/IEC 27001, which requires auditors to systematically examine an organization’s information security risks, including the management of outsourced processes4. The auditors’ request for evidence suggests that they were not satisfied with verbal assurances alone and sought to verify that SendPay had a formal, documented process for monitoring outsourced activities, which is a requirement for maintaining an effective Information Security Management System (ISMS)5.

Therefore, the correct answer is: A. The auditors demonstrated professional skepticism.

The correct sequence of the steps of the audit lifecycle according to ISO 19011:2018 is:

• Step 1: Audit initiation
• Step 2: Audit preparation
• Step 3: Conducting the audit
• Step 4: Preparing and distributing the audit report
• Step 5: Audit completion
• Step 6: Audit follow-up

This sequence reflects the logical order of the audit activities, from establishing the audit objectives, scope and criteria, to verifying the implementation and effectiveness of the corrective actions. However, ISO 19011:2018 also recognizes that some audit activities can be iterative or concurrent, depending on the nature and complexity of the audit. For example, audit preparation and conducting the audit can overlap when new information or changes occur during the audit. Similarly, audit follow-up can be integrated with audit completion when the corrective actions are verified shortly after the audit. Therefore, the audit lifecycle should be adapted to the specific context and needs of each audit.

The Check stage of the PDCA cycle involves monitoring and measuring the performance of the process and comparing it with the planned objectives and criteria. In the context of managing an internal audit programme, this stage includes verifying the effectiveness of the internal audit programme by evaluating whether it meets its objectives, scope, and criteria, and whether it is implemented in accordance with ISO 19011 guidelines1. It also includes reviewing the trends in internal audit results by analyzing the data collected from the audits, such as audit findings, nonconformities, corrective actions, opportunities for improvement, and customer feedback1. References: ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems

By drafting a procedure for information labeling, EsBank has submitted an action plan to resolve the nonconformity. This step addresses the immediate issue identified during the audit by establishing a consistent approach to labeling information according to its classification.

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 8.1, the organization must plan, implement and control the processes needed to meet the information security requirements, and to implement the actions determined in clause 6.1. The organization must also ensure that the outsourced processes are controlled or influenced. According to control A.5.24, the organization must establish and maintain an information security incident management process that includes reporting information security events and weaknesses. Therefore, the use of lower grade machines for the secure disposal of confidential documents and media could pose a significant information security risk and a potential breach of contract with the clients. The auditor should respond to this information by:

• A. Advising the individual managing the audit programme of any recommendation by you to conduct a further audit prior to certification. This is in accordance with ISO/IEC 27006:2022 clause 7.4.3, which states that the audit team leader shall report to the certification body any situation that may significantly affect the audit conclusions or the certification decision, and propose any necessary changes to the audit plan.
• C. Considering the need for a subsequent audit within 4 weeks based on the additional information that has come to light. This is in accordance with ISO/IEC 27006:2022 clause 7.5.2, which states that the audit team leader shall review the audit findings and any other appropriate information collected during the audit to determine the audit conclusions, and to identify any need for a subsequent audit.
• G. Verifying with the auditee that lower grade machines are used in certain circumstances. This is in accordance with ISO/IEC 27006:2022 clause 7.4.2, which states that the audit team leader shall ensure that the audit is conducted in accordance with the audit plan, and that any changes to the plan are agreed upon and documented.

The other options are not appropriate responses, as they either ignore the information, exceed the scope of the audit, or prematurely raise a nonconformity without sufficient evidence. For example:

• B. Cancelling the production of the audit report and instead reviewing the organization’s contracts with its clients to determine whether they have permitted the use of lower grade machines. This is not a suitable response, as it would delay the audit process and the certification decision, and it would involve reviewing documents that are outside the scope of the ISMS audit. The auditor should focus on verifying the information security risk assessment and treatment process, and the information security incident management process, as they relate to the use of lower grade machines.
• D. Doing nothing. All audits are based on a sample and the sample you took did not include a planned review of the lower grade machines. This is not a suitable response, as it would disregard a significant information security risk and a potential nonconformity that could affect the audit conclusions and the certification decision. The auditor should follow up on the information provided by the employee and verify its validity and impact.
• E. Extending the certification audit duration to create additional time to audit the use of the lower grade machines. This is not a suitable response, as it would disrupt the audit schedule and the availability of the audit team and the auditee. The auditor should report the situation to the certification body and propose any necessary changes to the audit plan, such as conducting a subsequent audit.
• F. Raising a nonconformity against 8.1 Operational Planning and Control as the organization has not been open about its processes. This is not a suitable response, as it would be based on a single source of information that has not been verified or corroborated. The auditor should collect sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support any nonconformity, and should also consider the root cause and the severity of the nonconformity.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clauses 8.1 and Annex A control A.5.24
• ISO/IEC 27006:2022, clauses 7.4.2, 7.4.3, and 7.5.2
• [PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor], pages 18-19, 23-24
• A Step-by-Step Guide to Conducting an ISO 27001 Internal Audit
• ISO 27001 – Annex A.16: Information Security Incident Management

The best response to the email from the IT support team asking for personal details is to not respond to the email and report it to your supervisor. The email is likely a phishing attempt, which is a form of social engineering that uses deceptive emails or other messages to trick recipients into revealing sensitive information, such as passwords, credit card numbers, bank account details, etc. Phishing emails often impersonate legitimate organizations or individuals and create a sense of urgency or curiosity to lure the victims into clicking on malicious links, opening malicious attachments or providing personal information. The IT support team should never ask for your password or other personal details via email, as this is a violation of information security policies and best practices. Ignoring the email or responding to it by saying that one should not share the password with anyone are not sufficient responses, as they do not alert the IT support team or your supervisor about the phishing attempt, which could affect other users as well. Reporting the email to your supervisor is a responsible action that could help prevent further damage or compromise of information. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organization to implement awareness and training programs to make users aware of the risks of social engineering attacks, such as phishing, and how to avoid them (see clause A.7.2.2). References: CQI & IRCA Certified ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Training Course, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, What is Phishing?

Vehicular incidents are not a type of information security attack. A vehicular incident is an event that involves a vehicle or its driver causing damage or injury to people or property. A vehicular incident may have an impact on information security if it affects the availability or integrity of information or systems that are transported or accessed by vehicles, but it is not an intentional or malicious attack on information security. Legal incidents are a type of information security attack that involve legal actions or disputes that may compromise the confidentiality or integrity of information or systems. Technical vulnerabilities are a type of information security attack that exploit weaknesses or flaws in software or hardware that may compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information or systems. Privacy incidents are a type of information security attack that involve unauthorized access or disclosure of personal or sensitive information that may compromise the confidentiality or integrity of information or systems. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 25. : [ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB], page 13.

The two standards that are used as ISMS third-party certification audit criteria are ISO/IEC 27001 and relevant legal, statutory, and regulatory requirements. ISO/IEC 27001 specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS)1. Relevant legal, statutory, and regulatory requirements are those that apply to the organization’s information security aspects and objectives2. The other options are either not standards (E) or not directly related to the ISMS certification audit criteria (A, B, C, F). References: 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Clause 1 \n2: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Clause 4.2

Machine learning is a subset of artificial intelligence that involves the use of algorithms and statistical models to enable systems to improve their performance on a specific task over time with experience or data, without being explicitly programmed. In the context of the scenario, machine learning would be the technology that allows the chatbot to learn from patterns in queries to provide the right answers.

Information is an asset like other important business assets, as it has value to an organization and consequently needs to be protected. Information can be in any form, such as electronic, paper, or verbal. Information security is the protection of information from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction2. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) | CQI | IRCA

 According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 6.1, the organization must establish, implement and maintain an information security risk management process that includes the following activities:

• establishing and maintaining information security risk criteria;
• ensuring that repeated information security risk assessments produce consistent, valid and comparable results;
• identifying the information security risks;
• analyzing the information security risks;
• evaluating the information security risks;
• treating the information security risks;
• accepting the information security risks and the residual information security risks;
• communicating and consulting with stakeholders throughout the process;
• monitoring and reviewing the information security risks and the risk treatment plan.

According to control A.5.29, the organization must establish, document, implement and maintain processes, procedures and controls to ensure the required level of continuity for information security during a disruptive situation. The organization must also:

• determine its requirements for information security and the continuity of information security management in adverse situations, e.g. during a crisis or disaster;
• establish, document, implement and maintain processes, procedures and controls to ensure the required level of continuity for information security during an adverse situation;
• verify the availability of information processing facilities.

Therefore, the following options will not be in your audit trail, as they are not relevant to the information security risk management process or the information security continuity process:

• E. Collect more evidence on how the organisation makes sure all staff periodically conduct a positive Covid test (Relevant to control A.7.2). This is not relevant to the information security aspects of business continuity management, as it is related to the health and safety of the staff, not the protection of information assets. Control A.7.2 is about screening of personnel prior to employment, not during employment.
• G. Collect more evidence on how the organisation performs a business risk assessment to evaluate how fast the existing residents can be discharged from the nursing home. (Relevant to clause 6). This is not relevant to the information security aspects of business continuity management, as it is related to the operational and financial aspects of the business, not the identification and treatment of information security risks. Clause 6 is about the information security risk management process, not the business risk management process.
• H. Collect more evidence on what resources the organisation provides to support the staff working from home. (Relevant to clause 7.1). This is not relevant to the information security aspects of business continuity management, as it is related to the general provision of resources for the ISMS, not the specific processes, procedures and controls to ensure the continuity of information security during a disruptive situation. Clause 7.1 is about determining and providing the resources needed for the establishment, implementation, maintenance and continual improvement of the ISMS, not the resources needed for the staff working from home.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clauses 6.1, 7.1, and Annex A control A.5.29
• [PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor], pages 14-15, 17, 22-23
• ISO 27001:2022 Annex A Control 5.29 - What’s New?
• ISO 22301 Business Continuity Management System

1. An auditor using a copy of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 to check that its requirements are met:

Termed: Reviewing audit criteria.

Justification: The auditor is comparing the auditee's information security management system (ISMS) against the established criteria outlined in the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standard. This activity falls under the use of audit criteria to determine conformity or nonconformity.

2. An auditor's note that the auditee is not adhering to its clear desk policy:

Termed: Identifying an audit finding.

Justification: The auditor has observed a deviation from the auditee's established policy on clear desks. This observation is documented as a potential nonconformity, which requires further investigation and evaluation.

3. An auditor making a decision regarding the auditee's conformity or otherwise to criteria:

Termed: Determining an audit conclusion.

Justification: Based on the collected audit evidence and evaluation against the established criteria, the auditor forms an opinion about the overall compliance of the auditee's ISMS. This opinion is the audit conclusion and is a key element of the audit report.

4. An auditor examining verifiable records relevant to the audit process:

Termed: Collecting audit evidence.

Justification: The auditor is gathering objective and verifiable information to support their findings and conclusions. This information comes from various sources, including documents, records, interviews, and observations.

The correct answers for matching each of the descriptions with the appropriate risk term are:

• The strategy chosen to respond to a specific information security risk: This is a definition of information security risk treatment. According to ISO/IEC 27000:2022, information security risk treatment is “the process of selecting and implementing measures to modify the information security risk” Section 3.33.
• The effect of uncertainty on information security objectives: This is a definition of information security risk. According to ISO/IEC 27000:2022, information security risk is “the effect of uncertainty on information security objectives” Section 3.32.
• The requirements against which information security risks are evaluated: This is a definition of information security risk criteria. According to ISO/IEC 27000:2022, information security risk criteria are “the terms of reference by which the significance of information security risks is assessed” Section 3.31.
• A definition of the overall level of information security risk that is considered to be tolerable: This is a definition of information security risk acceptance criteria. According to ISO/IEC 27000:2022, information security risk acceptance criteria are “the level of information security risk that is acceptable” Section 3.30.

This is a minor nonconformity. The backup frequency not adhering to the company's procedure of daily backups but occurring once a month represents a deviation from established processes, yet it might not immediately impact the effectiveness of the information security management system.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause A.12.3 (Backup)

The best action to take in this scenario is to determine whether any additional effective arrangements are in place to verify individual access to secure areas, such as CCTV. This action is consistent with the audit principle of evidence-based approach, which requires the auditor to obtain sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support the audit findings and conclusions1. By verifying the existence and effectiveness of other security controls, the auditor can assess the extent and impact of the nonconformity observed, and determine the appropriate audit finding and recommendation.

The other options are not the best actions to take in this scenario, because they are either premature or inappropriate. For example:

•Option A is inappropriate, because it is not the auditor’s role to suggest specific solutions or improvements to the auditee, but rather to report the audit findings and recommendations based on the audit criteria and objectives2. A large sign in reception may not be an effective or feasible solution to address the issue of tailgating, and it may not reflect the root cause of the problem.

•Option C is premature, because it assumes that the control A.7.1 ‘security perimeters’ is not adequately implemented, without verifying the existence and effectiveness of other security controls that may compensate for the observed nonconformity. The auditor should not jump to conclusions based on a single observation, but rather gather sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support the audit finding3.

•Option D is premature, because it assumes that the control A.7.6 ‘working in secure areas’ is not adequately implemented, without verifying the existence and effectiveness of other security controls that may compensate for the observed nonconformity. The auditor should not jump to conclusions based on a single observation, but rather gather sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support the audit finding3.

•Option E is inappropriate, because it is not related to the observed nonconformity, which is about the access control to secure areas, not the information security requirements agreed upon with the supplier. The auditor should not raise a nonconformity based on irrelevant or incorrect audit criteria4.

•Option F is inappropriate, because it is not the auditor’s role to suggest specific solutions or improvements to the auditee, but rather to report the audit findings and recommendations based on the audit criteria and objectives2. Requiring contractors to be accompanied at all times when accessing secure facilities may not be an effective or feasible solution to address the issue of tailgating, and it may not reflect the root cause of the problem.

References: 1: ISO 19011:2018, 5.2; 2: ISO 19011:2018, 6.6; 3: ISO 19011:2018, 6.2; 4: ISO 19011:2018, 6.3; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018

As an employee, you should do the following when you see a visitor roaming around without visitor’s ID, except saying “hi” and offering coffee. Saying “hi” and offering coffee is not an appropriate action, as it may imply that you are welcoming or endorsing the visitor without verifying their identity or purpose. This may also give the visitor an opportunity to gain your trust or exploit your kindness. Calling the receptionist and informing about the visitor is an appropriate action, as it alerts the responsible staff to handle the situation and ensure that the visitor is authorized and registered. Greeting and asking him what is his business is an appropriate action, as it shows your concern and curiosity about the visitor’s presence and intention. Escorting him to his destination is an appropriate action, as it prevents the visitor from wandering around unattended and accessing unauthorized areas or information. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 42. : [ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB], page 15.

The two statements that are valid audit conclusions are:

•The ISMS policy has been effectively communicated to the organisation

•The organisation’s ISMS objectives meet the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022

According to ISO 19011:2018, an audit conclusion is the outcome of an audit, provided by the audit team after considering the audit objectives and all audit findings1. An audit conclusion can be positive or negative, depending on whether the audit criteria are fulfilled or not. An audit conclusion can also include recommendations for improvement or recognition of good practices.

The statements D and E are valid audit conclusions, because they express the outcome of the audit based on the audit criteria and findings. For example:

•Statement D is a positive audit conclusion, because it indicates that the organisation has fulfilled the requirement of clause 5.2.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the ISMS policy must be communicated within the organisation and to relevant interested parties2. The audit team must have obtained sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support this conclusion, such as records of communication, awareness activities, feedback, etc.

•Statement E is a positive audit conclusion, because it indicates that the organisation has fulfilled the requirement of clause 6.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organisation must establish ISMS objectives that are consistent with the ISMS policy and relevant to the information security risks3. The audit team must have obtained sufficient and appropriate audit evidence to support this conclusion, such as records of objective setting, risk assessment, alignment with policy, etc.

The other statements are not valid audit conclusions, because they do not express the outcome of the audit based on the audit criteria and findings. They are rather examples of audit findings, which are the results of the evaluation of the collected audit evidence against the audit criteria4. Audit findings can indicate either conformity or nonconformity with the audit criteria, or opportunities for improvement. For example:

•Statement A is a negative audit finding, because it indicates a nonconformity with the requirement of clause 7.2.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organisation must provide information security awareness education and training to persons under its control5. The audit team must have identified and documented this nonconformity, and reported it to the auditee.

•Statement B is a negative audit finding, because it indicates a nonconformity with the requirement of clause 6.1.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organisation must maintain and review the information security risk assessment at planned intervals or when significant changes occur6. The audit team must have identified and documented this nonconformity, and reported it to the auditee.

•Statement C is a negative audit finding, because it indicates a nonconformity with the requirement of clause 10.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organisation must take action to eliminate the causes of nonconformities and prevent recurrence7. The audit team must have identified and documented this nonconformity, and reported it to the auditee.

•Statement F is a negative audit finding, because it indicates a nonconformity with the requirement of clause 6.1.3 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organisation must determine the controls that are necessary to implement the risk treatment plan, and document them in the statement of applicability8. The audit team must have identified and documented this nonconformity, and reported it to the auditee.

References: 1: ISO 19011:2018, 3.15; 2: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 5.2.2; 3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.2; 4: ISO 19011:2018, 3.14; 5: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 7.2.2; 6: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.2; 7: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 10.1; 8: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 6.1.3; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022

If an organization like OrgXY informs the certification body that it is not ready to conduct the surveillance audit as scheduled, the certification may be suspended. This is because the surveillance audit is a critical part of the ongoing certification maintenance, required to ensure continued compliance with the standard.

References: PECB ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Course Material; ISO/IEC 27001:2013, general guidelines on certification and surveillance requirements

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, one of the professional behaviours expected from an audit team leader is to be decisive, which means to “reach timely conclusions based on logical reasoning and analysis” (page 8). Being open minded, ethical, and perceptive are also desirable qualities for an audit team leader, but they do not match the description given in the question. References: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 8.

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 7.2.2, the organization shall ensure that all persons who have access to information are aware of the information security policy and their contribution to the effectiveness of the ISMS, including the benefits of improved information security performance2. Therefore, awareness training on information security is a requirement for all persons, not just new hires. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) | CQI | IRCA

A group of black text Description automatically generated

According to ISO 27001:2022, the standard for information security management systems (ISMS), the correct sequence for the information security risk assessment process is as follows:

• Establish information security criteria
• Identify the information security risks
• Analyse the information security risks
• Evaluate the information security risks

The first step is to establish the information security criteria, which include the risk assessment methodology, the risk acceptance criteria, and the risk evaluation criteria. These criteria define how the organization will perform the risk assessment, what level of risk is acceptable, and how the risks will be compared and prioritized.

The second step is to identify the information security risks, which involve identifying the assets, threats, vulnerabilities, and existing controls that are relevant to the ISMS. The organization should also identify the potential consequences and likelihood of each risk scenario.

The third step is to analyse the information security risks, which involve estimating the level of risk for each risk scenario based on the criteria established in the first step. The organization should also consider the sources of uncertainty and the confidence level of the risk estimation.

The fourth step is to evaluate the information security risks, which involve comparing the estimated risk levels with the risk acceptance criteria and determining whether the risks are acceptable or need treatment. The organization should also prioritize the risks based on the risk evaluation criteria and the objectives of the ISMS.

References: ISO 27001:2022 Clause 6.1.2 Information security risk assessment, ISO 27001 Risk Assessment & Risk Treatment: The Complete Guide - Advisera, ISO 27001 Risk Assessment: 7 Step Guide - IT Governance UK Blog

Prior to the initiation of stage 2 audit, Lawsy should review and confirm the audit plan with the certification body. This ensures that both parties agree on the objectives, scope, and procedures for the stage 2 audit, thus aligning expectations and facilitating a smoother audit process.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, the audit objectives are defined by the audit client and may include determining the extent of conformity or nonconformity of the audited management system against the audit criteria, evaluating the ability of the audited management system to ensure that the organization meets applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements, identifying potential improvement opportunities for the audited management system, and facilitating continual improvement of the audited management system1. Therefore, these three phrases are examples of objectives in relation to an audit. The other options are not objectives, but rather elements or factors that may influence or affect an audit. For example, an international standard is a source of audit criteria, a management policy is a part of the audited management system, and completing an audit on time is a requirement for an effective audit. References: ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems

Phishing is a type of information security incident that falls under the category of cracker/hacker attacks. Phishing is a form of fraud that uses deceptive emails or other messages to trick recipients into revealing sensitive information, such as passwords, credit card numbers, bank account details, etc. Phishing emails often impersonate legitimate organizations or individuals and create a sense of urgency or curiosity to lure the victims into clicking on malicious links, opening malicious attachments or providing personal information. Phishing is a common and serious threat to information security, as it can lead to identity theft, financial loss, data breach, malware infection or other damages. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organization to implement awareness and training programs to make users aware of the risks of social engineering attacks, such as phishing, and how to avoid them (see clause A.7.2.2). References: CQI & IRCA Certified ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Training Course, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, What is Phishing?

According to ISO/IEC 27000:2018, which provides an overview and vocabulary of information security management systems, an information security event is an identified occurrence of a system, service or network state indicating a possible breach of information security policy or failure of safeguards, or a previously unknown situation that may be security relevant1. An information security incident is a single or a series of unwanted or unexpected information security events that have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security1. Therefore, based on this definition, three examples of information security incidents are:

• A contractor who has not been paid deletes top management ICT accounts: This is an example of an unwanted or unexpected information security event that has a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, as it may result in loss of access, data, or functionality for the top management.
• An unhappy employee changes payroll records without permission: This is an example of an unwanted or unexpected information security event that has a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, as it may result in financial fraud, legal liability, or reputational damage for the organization.
• The organisation’s marketing data is copied by hackers and sold to a competitor: This is an example of an unwanted or unexpected information security event that has a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, as it may result in loss of confidentiality, competitive advantage, or customer trust for the organization.

The other options are not examples of information security incidents, but rather information security events that may or may not lead to incidents depending on their impact and severity. For example:

• The organisation’s malware protection software prevents a virus: This is an example of an identified occurrence of a system state indicating a possible breach of information security policy or failure of safeguards, but it does not have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, as it is prevented by the malware protection software.
• A hard drive is used after its recommended replacement date: This is an example of an identified occurrence of a system state indicating a possible breach of information security policy or failure of safeguards, but it does not have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, unless it fails or causes other problems.
• The organisation receives a phishing email: This is an example of an identified occurrence of a network state indicating a possible breach of information security policy or failure of safeguards, but it does not have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, unless it is opened or responded to by the recipient.
• An employee fails to clear their desk at the end of their shift: This is an example of an identified occurrence of a service state indicating a possible breach of information security policy or failure of safeguards, but it does not have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, unless the desk contains sensitive or confidential information that is accessed by unauthorized persons.
• The organisation fails a third-party penetration test: This is an example of an identified occurrence of a system state indicating a possible breach of information security policy or failure of safeguards, but it does not have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security, unless the penetration test reveals serious vulnerabilities that are exploited by malicious actors.

References: ISO/IEC 27000:2018 - Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Overview and vocabulary

Materiality should be considered during the initial contact to obtain reasonable assurance that the audit can be successfully completed. Determining materiality helps establish the threshold for the significance of audit findings, ensuring that the audit focuses on substantial issues that could impact the audit conclusions.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

• Establishing the audit programme objectives, scope and criteria
• Determining the resources necessary for the audit programme, such as the audit team members, the budget, the time, the tools, etc.
• Selecting and appointing the audit team leaders and auditors
• Reviewing and approving the audit plans and arrangements
• Ensuring the effective communication and coordination among the audit programme stakeholders, such as the auditors, the auditees, the certification bodies, the accreditation bodies, etc.
• Keeping informed the accreditation body on the progress of the audit programme, especially in case of any significant changes, issues, or nonconformities
• Monitoring and reviewing the performance and results of the audit programme and the audit teams
• Evaluating the feedback and satisfaction of the auditees and other interested parties
• Identifying and implementing the opportunities for improvement of the audit programme

The individual(s) managing the audit programme are not responsible for the following tasks, which are delegated to the audit team leaders or the auditors12:

• Communicating with the auditee during the audit, such as conducting the opening and closing meetings, resolving any audit-related problems, reporting any audit findings, etc.
• Determining the legal requirements applicable to each audit, such as the confidentiality, the impartiality, the consent, the liability, etc.
• Defining the objectives, scope and criteria for an individual audit, which are derived from the audit programme and agreed with the auditee
• Defining the plan of an individual audit, which includes the audit schedule, the audit activities, the audit methods, the audit documents, etc.

References:

• ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 19-20

 Integrity of data means accuracy and completeness of the data. Integrity is one of the three main objectives of information security, along with confidentiality and availability. Integrity ensures that information and systems are not corrupted, modified, or deleted by unauthorized actions or events. Data should be viewable at all times is not related to integrity, but to availability. Data should be accessed by only the right people is not related to integrity, but to confidentiality. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 24. : [ISO/IEC 27001 Brochures | PECB], page 4.

The main purpose of a Stage 1 third-party audit is to determine readiness for a Stage 2 audit. A Stage 1 audit is a preliminary assessment that evaluates the organization’s ISMS documentation, scope, context, and objectives, and identifies any major gaps or nonconformities that need to be addressed before the Stage 2 audit. A Stage 1 audit does not introduce the audit team to the client, as this is done during the audit planning phase. A Stage 1 audit does not check for legal compliance by the organization, as this is done during the Stage 2 audit. A Stage 1 audit does not prepare an independent audit report, as this is done after the Stage 2 audit. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 70. : ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB, page 23.

The number of days assigned to a third-party audit is not determined by the auditee’s availability, but by the audit program, which considers the audit scope, objectives, criteria, risks, and resources12. The auditee’s availability is only one factor that affects the audit planning and scheduling, but not the audit duration3. Auditors approved for conducting onsite audits do require additional training for virtual audits, as there are significant differences in the skillset required. Virtual audits pose different challenges and opportunities than onsite audits, such as communication, technology, security, and evidence collection4 . Auditors need to be familiar with the tools and techniques for conducting remote audits, as well as the ethical and professional behavior expected in a virtual environment . References:

• PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 18
• ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 5.3.2
• ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.3.1
• Deloitte - Conducting a Virtual Internal Audit, page 1
• [A Guide to Conducting Effective and Efficient Remote Audits], page 1
• [ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems], clause 7.2.3
• [Remote Auditing Best Practices & Checklist for Regulatory Compliance], page 1

The difference between a restricted and confidential document is that a restricted document is to be shared among named individuals, while a confidential document is to be shared among an authorized group. Restricted and confidential are examples of information classification levels that indicate the sensitivity and value of information and the degree of protection required for it. Restricted documents contain information that could cause serious damage or harm to the organization or its stakeholders if disclosed to unauthorized persons. Therefore, they should only be accessed by specific individuals who have a legitimate need to know and are authorized by the information owner. Confidential documents contain information that could cause damage or harm to the organization or its stakeholders if disclosed to unauthorized persons. Therefore, they should only be accessed by a defined group of people who have a legitimate need to know and are authorized by the information owner. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organization to classify information in terms of legal requirements, value, criticality and sensitivity to unauthorized disclosure or modification (see clause A.8.2.1). References: CQI & IRCA Certified ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Training Course, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, What is Information Classification?

The auditor should consider "audit risks" when determining the "audit objectives." Understanding the risks associated with the audit helps define the objectives clearly, ensuring that the audit focuses on the most significant areas of concern, aligns with the audit scope, and adequately addresses the risks identified.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

Third-party accredited certification of information security management systems to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 provides assurance to organisations and interested parties that the organisation’s management system is maintained and effective, meaning that it conforms to the requirements of the standard, meets the organisation’s objectives and policies, and addresses the risks and opportunities related to information security. Third-party accredited certification also demonstrates that the organisation’s management system adopted a systematic approach to information security, meaning that it follows the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle, applies the risk-based thinking principle, and considers the context and needs of the organisation and its stakeholders

• Risk analysis is the process by which the nature of the risk is determined along with its probability and impact. Risk analysis involves estimating the likelihood and consequences of potential events or situations that could affect the organization’s information security objectives or requirements12. Risk analysis could use qualitative or quantitative methods, or a combination of both12.
• Risk management is the process by which a risk is controlled at all stages of its life cycle by means of the application of organisational policies, procedures and practices. Risk management involves establishing the context, identifying, analyzing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and reviewing the risks that could affect the organization’s information security performance or compliance12. Risk management aims to ensure that risks are identified and treated in a timely and effective manner, and that opportunities for improvement are exploited12.
• Risk identification is the process by which a risk is recognised and described. Risk identification involves identifying and documenting the sources, causes, events, scenarios, and potential impacts of risks that could affect the organization’s information security objectives or requirements12. Risk identification could use various techniques, such as brainstorming, interviews, checklists, surveys, or historical data12.
• Risk evaluation is the process by which the impact and/or probability of a risk is compared against risk criteria to determine if it is tolerable. Risk evaluation involves comparing the results of risk analysis with predefined criteria that reflect the organization’s risk appetite, tolerance, or acceptance12. Risk evaluation could use various methods, such as ranking, scoring, or matrix12. Risk evaluation helps to prioritize and decide on the appropriate risk treatment options12.
• Risk mitigation is the process by which the impact and/or probability of a risk is reduced by means of the application of controls. Risk mitigation involves selecting and implementing measures that are designed to prevent, reduce, transfer, or accept risks that could affect the organization’s information security objectives or requirements12. Risk mitigation could include various types of controls, such as technical, organizational, legal, or physical12. Risk mitigation should be based on a cost-benefit analysis and a residual risk assessment12.
• Risk transfer is the process by which a risk is passed to a third party, for example through obtaining appropriate insurance. Risk transfer involves sharing or shifting some or all of the responsibility or liability for a risk to another party that has more capacity or capability to manage it12. Risk transfer could include various methods, such as contracts, agreements, partnerships, outsourcing, or insurance12. Risk transfer should not be used as a substitute for effective risk management within the organization12.

References :=

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements
• ISO/IEC 27005:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security risk management

• A. Advise the Shipping Manager that his request will be included in the audit report. This is true because the audit report should document all the relevant information and evidence related to the audit, including any requests or objections raised by the auditee. The audit report should also provide the rationale for the audit conclusions and recommendations12.
• B. Advise management that the new information provided will be discussed when the auditors have more time. This is true because the auditors should not make hasty decisions based on incomplete or unverified information. The auditors should review and evaluate the new information in a systematic and objective manner, and determine whether it affects the audit findings, nonconformities, or conclusions12.
• F. Thank the Shipping Manager for his honesty but advise that withdrawing the nonconformity is not the right way to proceed. This is true because the auditors should acknowledge and appreciate the cooperation and transparency of the auditee, but also maintain their professional integrity and independence. The auditors should not withdraw a nonconformity unless they are satisfied that it was raised in error or that it has been effectively corrected and verified12.

References :=

• ISO 19011:2022 Guidelines for auditing management systems
• ISO/IEC 17021-1:2022 Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems — Part 1: Requirements

Corrective action is a process of identifying and eliminating the root causes of nonconformities or incidents that have occurred or could potentially occur, in order to prevent their recurrence or occurrence. Corrective action is part of the improvement requirement of ISO 27001 and follows a standard workflow of identification, evaluation, implementation, review and documentation of corrections and corrective actions. References: Procedure for Corrective Action, Nonconformity & Corrective Action For ISO 27001 Requirement 10.1, PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor (page 12)

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), clause 9.3 requires top management to review the organization’s ISMS at planned intervals to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness1. Clause 9.2 requires the organization to conduct internal audits at planned intervals to provide information on whether the ISMS conforms to its own requirements and those of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, and is effectively implemented and maintained1. Therefore, when reviewing the audit process and audit findings as a final check before the external certification body arrives, an internal ISMS auditor should verify that these clauses are met in accordance with the audit criteria.

Six of the following statements would cause concern in respect of conformity to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements:

• The audit programme shows management reviews taking place at irregular intervals during the year: This statement would cause concern because it implies that the organization is not conducting management reviews at planned intervals, as required by clause 9.3. This may affect the ability of top management to ensure the continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of the ISMS.
• The audit programme does not take into account the relative importance of information security processes: This statement would cause concern because it implies that the organization is not applying a risk-based approach to determine the audit frequency, methods, scope and criteria, as recommended by ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems2. This may affect the ability of the organization to identify and address the most significant risks and opportunities for its ISMS.
• Although the scope for each internal audit has been defined, there are no audit criteria defined for the audits carried out to date: This statement would cause concern because it implies that the organization is not establishing audit criteria for each internal audit, as required by clause 9.2. Audit criteria are the set of policies, procedures or requirements used as a reference against which audit evidence is compared2. Without audit criteria, it is not possible to determine whether the ISMS conforms to its own requirements and those of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• Audit reports to date have used key performance indicator information to focus solely on the efficiency of ISMS processes: This statement would cause concern because it implies that the organization is not evaluating the effectiveness of ISMS processes, as required by clause 9.1. Effectiveness is the extent to which planned activities are realized and planned results achieved2. Efficiency is the relationship between the result achieved and the resources used2. Both aspects are important for measuring and evaluating ISMS performance and improvement.
• The audit programme does not take into account the results of previous audits: This statement would cause concern because it implies that the organization is not using the results of previous audits as an input for planning and conducting subsequent audits, as recommended by ISO 19011:20182. This may affect the ability of the organization to identify and address any recurring or unresolved issues or nonconformities related to its ISMS.
• Top management commitment to the ISMS will not be audited before the certification visit, according to the audit programme: This statement would cause concern because it implies that the organization is not verifying that top management demonstrates leadership and commitment with respect to its ISMS, as required by clause 5.1. This may affect the ability of top management to ensure that the ISMS policy and objectives are established and compatible with the strategic direction of the organization; that roles, responsibilities and authorities for relevant roles are assigned and communicated; that resources needed for the ISMS are available; that communication about information security matters is established; that continual improvement of the ISMS is promoted; that other relevant management reviews are aligned with those of information security; and that support is provided to other relevant roles1.

The other statements would not cause concern in respect of conformity to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements:

• Audit reports are not held in hardcopy (i.e. on paper). They are only stored as ".POF documents on the organisation’s intranet: This statement would not cause concern because it does not imply any nonconformity with ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements. The standard does not prescribe any specific format or media for documenting or storing audit reports, as long as they are controlled according to clause 7.5.
• The audit programme mandates auditors must be independent of the areas they audit in order to satisfy the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022: This statement would not cause concern because it does not imply any nonconformity with ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements. The standard does not prescribe any specific requirement for auditor independence, as long as the audit is conducted objectively and impartially, in accordance with ISO 19011:20182.
• The audit programme does not reference audit methods or audit responsibilities: This statement would not cause concern because it does not imply any nonconformity with ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements. The standard does not prescribe any specific requirement for referencing audit methods or audit responsibilities in the audit programme, as long as they are defined and documented according to ISO 19011:20182.
• The audit process states the results of audits will be made available to ‘relevant’ managers, not top management: This statement would not cause concern because it does not imply any nonconformity with ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements. The standard does not prescribe any specific requirement for communicating the results of audits to top management, as long as they are reported to the relevant parties and used as an input for management review, according to clause 9.3.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements, ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems

• A. I will check the other data centres are treated as external providers, even though they are part of the same telecommunication group. This is appropriate because clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022 requires the organisation to ensure that externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system are controlled. Externally provided processes, products or services are those that are provided by any external party, regardless of the degree of its relationship with the organisation. Therefore, the other data centres within the same telecommunication group should be treated as external providers and subject to the same controls as any other external provider12
• B. I will ensure external providers have a documented process in place to notify the organisation of any risks arising from the use of its products or services. This is appropriate because clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022 requires the organisation to implement appropriate contractual requirements related to information security with external providers. One of the contractual requirements could be the obligation of the external provider to notify the organisation of any risks arising from the use of its products or services, such as security incidents, vulnerabilities, or changes that could affect the information security of the organisation. The external provider should have a documented process in place to ensure that such notification is timely, accurate, and complete12
• E. I will ensure the organisation is regularly monitoring, reviewing and evaluating external provider performance. This is appropriate because clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022 requires the organisation to monitor, review and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the externally provided processes, products or services. The organisation should have a process in place to measure and verify the conformity and suitability of the external provider’s deliverables and activities, and to provide feedback and improvement actions as necessary. The organisation should also maintain records of the monitoring, review and evaluation results12
• F. I will ensure the organisation has determined the need to communicate with external providers regarding the ISMS. This is appropriate because clause 7.4.2 of ISO 27001:2022 requires the organisation to determine the need for internal and external communications relevant to the information security management system, including the communication with external providers. The organisation should define the purpose, content, frequency, methods, and responsibilities for such communication, and ensure that it is consistent with the information security policy and objectives. The organisation should also retain documented information of the communication as evidence of its implementation12

The following activities are not appropriate for the assessment of external providers according to ISO 27001:2022:

• C. I will ensure that the organisation has a reserve external provider for each process it has identified as critical to preservation of the confidentiality, integrity and accessibility of its information. This is not appropriate because ISO 27001:2022 does not require the organisation to have a reserve external provider for each critical process. The organisation may choose to have a contingency plan or a backup solution in case of failure or disruption of the external provider, but this is not a mandatory requirement. The organisation should assess the risks and opportunities associated with the external provider and determine the appropriate treatment options, which may or may not include having a reserve external provider12
• D. I will limit my audit activity to externally provided processes as there is no need to audit externally provided products or services. This is not appropriate because clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022 requires the organisation to control the externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system. Externally provided products or services may include software, hardware, data, or cloud services that could affect the information security of the organisation. Therefore, the audit activity should cover both externally provided processes and products or services, as applicable12
• G. I will ensure that top management have assigned roles and responsibilities for those providing external ISMS processes as well as internal ISMS processes. This is not appropriate because clause 5.3 of ISO 27001:2022 requires the top management to assign the roles and responsibilities for the information security management system within the organisation, not for the external providers. The external providers are responsible for assigning their own roles and responsibilities for the processes, products or services they provide to the organisation. The organisation should ensure that the external providers have adequate competence and awareness for their roles and responsibilities, and that they are contractually bound to comply with the information security requirements of the organisation12
• H. I will ensure that the organisation ranks its external providers and allocates the majority of its work to those providers who are rated the highest. This is not appropriate because ISO 27001:2022 does not require the organisation to rank its external providers or to allocate its work based on such ranking. The organisation may choose to evaluate and compare the performance and effectiveness of its external providers, but this is not a mandatory requirement. The organisation should select and use its external providers based on the information security criteria and objectives that are relevant to the organisation12

References:

1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) Course by CQI and IRCA Certified Training 1 2: ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Training Course by PECB 2

Regular security awareness and training sessions for employees are a control measure aimed at preventing security incidents by ensuring that personnel are aware of information security threats and concerns, and understand their roles and responsibilities in safeguarding organizational assets. This proactive approach is designed to educate employees on the importance of security practices and to avoid the occurrence of security incidents. References: = This answer is based on the principles of personnel security management as outlined in ISO/IEC 27001, particularly in Annex A.7 which deals with human resource security before, during, and after employment, and Annex A.9 which focuses on access control and ensuring that employees have access only to the information that is necessary for their job role

Leaving the cabinet unlocked while the technician is on a lunch break exposes the client’s equipment and data to potential physical security risks, such as theft, damage, or tampering. This is a violation of the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requirements for physical entry (control 7.2) and physical security monitoring (control 7.4), which aim to prevent unauthorized access to information processing facilities and assets. Therefore, the appropriate actions for the auditor are:

• Raise an opportunity for improvement (OFI) suggesting that the cabinet doors are locked whenever clients leave their suites, even if they intend to return within a short time. This would enhance the security of the client’s equipment and data, and reduce the likelihood of security incidents.
• Review the CCTV records to ensure that only the client has accessed the cabinet since it was last confirmed as locked. This would verify the integrity and availability of the client’s equipment and data, and identify any possible unauthorized access or interference.
• With the permission of the guide, speak to the customer to confirm that they are in the process of swapping out a drive. This would validate the reason for leaving the cabinet unlocked, and assess the impact and risk of the activity on the client’s information security.

References: =

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 7.2, Physical entry
• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 7.4, Physical security monitoring
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 19, Audit Process
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 21, Audit Findings

The Statement of Applicability (SoA) is a core document within an ISMS that outlines the security controls an organization implements. When a new control, such as the SSH protocol, is implemented, it should be included in the SoA to reflect the current state of the ISMS. The SoA should be updated to justify the inclusion of the new control and to document how it is implemented within the organization12. References: = This guidance is based on the best practices for maintaining the SoA as per ISO/IEC 27001, which requires the SoA to be a living document that accurately reflects the security controls in use by the organization

The audit team stated that the risk of a significant defect occurring in Data Grid Inc.'s ISMS was low. This refers to "Control Risk," which is the risk that a misstatement could occur in any relevant assertion related to an ISMS and that the risk could not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by the organization's internal control systems.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

The purpose of retaining documented information related to the ISMS of an organisation is to the extent necessary, to have confidence that the processes have been carried out as planned. This means that the documented information provides evidence of the conformity and effectiveness of the ISMS, as well as the achievement of the information security objectives and the continual improvement of the ISMS. Documented information also supports the analysis and evaluation of the ISMS performance and the identification of opportunities for improvement. References: = ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 7.5.1; PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 17.

Management review is a crucial component of an ISMS that helps determine opportunities for continual improvement. Through management review, an organization assesses the performance and effectiveness of its ISMS, including reviewing opportunities for improvements and the need for changes to the ISMS, including the security policy and security objectives.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Clause 9.3 (Management Review)

Information security is a matter of building and maintaining trust. Trust is the confidence that information and information processing facilities are protected from unauthorized or malicious actions that could compromise their confidentiality, integrity or availability. Trust is essential for establishing and maintaining relationships with customers, partners, suppliers, employees and other stakeholders who rely on the organization’s information and services. Trust is also a key factor for achieving compliance with legal, regulatory and contractual obligations, as well as meeting the organization’s own information security objectives and policies. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 defines information security as “preservation of confidentiality, integrity and availability of information” (see clause 3.28) and states that “the purpose of an information security management system is to provide a framework for managing activities that influence the trustworthiness of information” (see Introduction). References: CQI & IRCA Certified ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Training Course, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, What is Trust?

The best way to dispose of a hard copy of a customer design document is to shred it using a shredder. This is because shredding ensures that the document is destroyed and cannot be reconstructed or accessed by unauthorized persons. A customer design document may contain sensitive or confidential information that could cause harm or damage to the customer or the organization if disclosed. Therefore, it is important to protect the confidentiality and integrity of the document until it is securely disposed of. Throwing it in any dustbin, giving it to the office boy to reuse it for other purposes, or reusing it for writing are not secure ways of disposing of the document, as they could expose the document to unauthorized access, theft, loss or damage. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organization to implement procedures for the secure disposal of media containing information (see clause A.8.3.2). References: CQI & IRCA Certified ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Training Course, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, What is Secure Disposal?

According to the ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor exam preparation guide1, audit evidence can be in various formats, such as records, statements of fact, or other information that is relevant and verifiable. Audit evidence can be collected by means of interviews, observation, sampling, testing, or other techniques. However, not all formats of audit evidence are acceptable or reliable. For example, unsigned hand written changes to test results (A) are not verifiable and may indicate tampering or falsification. Statements by a system engineer that cannot be verified (D) are also not reliable and may be biased or inaccurate. An audio recording of a dialog between the IT manager and a system engineer (F) may not be relevant to the audit criteria or may violate the confidentiality or consent of the parties involved. A statement of facts by the IT manager (B) may be relevant and verifiable, but it is not sufficient as audit evidence unless it is supported by other sources of information. Therefore, the two acceptable formats of audit evidence are documented information on results of IT audits © and observation of a previously recorded video demonstrating the performance of a hazardous activity (E), as they are relevant to the audit criteria and can be verified by other means. References: 1: https://pecb.com/pdf/exam-preparation-guides/pecb-iso-iec-27001-lead-auditor-exam-preparation-guide.pdf (page 9)

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 7.2, the organization must ensure that the persons doing work under its control are aware of the information security policy, their contribution to the effectiveness of the ISMS, the implications of not conforming to the ISMS requirements, and the benefits of improved information security performance. The organization must also provide information security awareness education and training to its personnel and relevant interested parties. According to control A.6.3, the organization must ensure that all employees and contractors are made aware of the information security incident management procedures and their expected roles and responsibilities. Therefore, an opportunity for improvement (OFI) can be identified if the information security incident training effectiveness can be improved, as evidenced by the differences in the understanding of the meaning of “weakness, event, and incident” among the staff.

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 9.1, the organization must monitor, measure, analyze and evaluate the information security performance and the effectiveness of the ISMS. The organization must also retain appropriate documented information as evidence of the monitoring and measurement results. According to control A.5.24, the organization must establish and maintain an information security incident management process that includes the following activities:

•reporting information security events and weaknesses;

•assessing and deciding on information security events;

•responding to information security incidents;

•learning from information security incidents;

•collecting evidence and disclosing information.

Therefore, a nonconformity (NC) can be identified if the terminology of the incident management reporting process is unclear, as evidenced by the staff misunderstanding of the meaning of “weakness, event, and incident”. This could lead to inconsistent or inaccurate reporting, assessment, response, learning, and disclosure of information security incidents, which could affect the information security performance and the effectiveness of the ISMS.

References:

•ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clauses 7.2, 9.1, and Annex A controls A.5.24 and A.6.3

•[PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor], pages 15-16, 18-19, 22-23

•ISO/IEC 27035-1:2016, clauses 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8

•ISO 27001 – Annex A.16: Information Security Incident Management

•ISO 27001:2022 Annex A Control 5.24 - What’s New?

The three options that will not be in your audit trail are A, C, and H. These options are either not relevant to the information security of ABC’s healthcare mobile app development, support, and lifecycle process, or not within the scope of your audit. The amount of money that residents’ family members pay to install the app (A) and the number of users of the app © are not related to the information security aspects or objectives of the ISMS1. The verification of the developer’s certifications (H) is not your responsibility as an ISMS auditor, as you should rely on the competence and impartiality of the certification bodies that issued them2. The other options are relevant and within the scope of your audit, as they relate to the security functions, testing, policies, and procedures of the mobile app development, support, and lifecycle process13. References: 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Clause 4.2 \n2: ISO/IEC 27006:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems, Clause 4.1 \n3: PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Exam Preparation Guide, Domain 5: Conducting an ISO/IEC 27001 audit

A first-party audit is an internal audit conducted by the organization itself or by an external party on its behalf. The objectives of a first-party audit are to: 12

• Confirm the scope of the management system is accurate, i.e., it covers all the processes, activities, locations, and functions that are relevant to the information security objectives and requirements of the organization.
• Update the management policy, i.e., review and revise the policy statement, roles and responsibilities, and objectives and targets of the information security management system (ISMS) based on the audit findings and feedback.

The other phrases are not objectives of a first-party audit, but rather:

• Apply international standards: This is a requirement for the ISMS, not an objective of the audit. The ISMS must conform to the ISO/IEC 27001 standard and any other applicable standards or regulations12
• Prepare the audit report for the certification body: This is an activity of a third-party audit, not a first-party audit. A third-party audit is an external audit conducted by an independent certification body to verify the conformity and effectiveness of the ISMS and to issue a certificate of compliance12
• Complete the audit on time: This is a performance indicator, not an objective of the audit. The audit should be completed within the planned time frame and budget, but this is not the primary purpose of the audit12
• Apply regulatory requirements: This is also a requirement for the ISMS, not an objective of the audit. The ISMS must comply with the legal and contractual obligations of the organization regarding information security12

References:

1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) Course by CQI and IRCA Certified Training 1 2: ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Training Course by PECB 2

The audit team leader suggesting a specific solution on resolving the nonconformities is unacceptable in an external audit. This could compromise the impartiality of the audit process by appearing to assist the auditee in corrective actions, which should independently originate from the auditee to ensure the integrity and effectiveness of the ISMS.

The correct option is D. There is a nonconformity (NC). The Service Manager does not comply with the software security management procedure. (Relevant to clause 8.1, control A.8.30). The IT Manager should have approved the test results according to the software security management procedure, not the Service Manager. The Service Manager’s decision to accept the failed security tests also violates the “security-by-design” and “security-by-default” principles that the organization adopted. The other options are either incorrect or irrelevant. The organization and developer did perform acceptance tests, but they failed (B, C). The Service Manager’s decision to continue the service does not justify the nonconformity (A). References: 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Clause 8.1 \n2: PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Exam Preparation Guide, Domain 5: Conducting an ISO/IEC 27001 audit

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, the auditee should take the following actions in response to a nonconformity against clause 6.1.3.e of ISO/IEC 27001:20221:

• Implement the appropriate risk treatment for each of the applicable controls, as this is the main requirement of clause 6.1.3.e and the objective of the risk treatment process2.
• Revise the relevant content in the Statement of Applicability to justify their exclusion, as this is the expected output of the risk treatment process and the evidence of the risk-based decisions3.
• Revisit the risk assessment process relating to the three controls, as this is the input for the risk treatment process and the source of identifying the risks and the controls4.

The other options are not correct because:

• Allocating responsibility for producing evidence to prove to auditors that the controls are implemented is not a valid action, as the audit team already found that there was no evidence of the implementation of the three controls.
• Compiling plans for the periodic assessment of the risks associated with the controls is not a valid action, as this is part of the risk monitoring and review process, not the risk treatment process5.
• Incorporating written procedures for the controls into the organisation’s Security Manual is not a valid action, as this is part of the documentation and operation of the ISMS, not the risk treatment process.
• Removing the three controls from the Statement of Applicability is not a valid action, as this is not a sufficient justification for their exclusion and does not reflect the risk treatment process.
• Undertaking a survey of customers to find out if the controls are needed by them is not a valid action, as this is not a relevant criterion for the risk assessment and treatment process, which should be based on the organisation’s own context and objectives.

References: 1: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 36, section 4.5.22: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3.e3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3.f4: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.25: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.2. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 7.5 and 8. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3.d. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 4.1 and 4.2.

 Information or data that are classified as public do not require labeling. Public information or data are those that are intended for general disclosure and have no impact on the organization’s operations or reputation if disclosed. Labeling is a method of implementing classification, which is a process of structuring information according to its sensitivity and value for the organization. Labeling helps to identify the level of protection and handling required for each type of information. Information or data that are classified as internal, confidential, or highly confidential require labeling, as they contain information that is not suitable for public disclosure and may cause harm or loss to the organization if disclosed. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 34. : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 37. : [ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB], page 14.

A third-party audit is an independent assessment of an organisation’s management system by an external auditor, who is not affiliated with the organisation or its customers. The auditor verifies that the management system meets the requirements of a specific standard, such as ISO 27001, and evaluates its effectiveness and performance. The auditor also identifies any strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or risks of the management system, and provides recommendations for improvement. The purpose of a third-party audit is to provide an objective and impartial evaluation of the organisation’s management system, and to inform a certification decision by a certification body. A certification body is an organisation that grants a certificate of conformity to the organisation, after reviewing the audit report and evidence, and confirming that the management system meets the certification criteria. A certification decision is the outcome of the certification process, which can be positive (granting, maintaining, renewing, or expanding the scope of certification) or negative (suspending, withdrawing, or reducing the scope of certification). References:

• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 19-25
• ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems
• The ISO 27001 audit process | ISMS.online

The two phrases that would apply to ‘check’ in the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle for a business process are:

• C. Verifying training
• F. Auditing processes

• C. This phrase applies to ‘check’ in the PDCA cycle because it involves measuring and evaluating the effectiveness of the training activities that were implemented in the ‘do’ phase. Training is an important aspect of information security awareness, education, and competence, which are required by clause 7.2 of ISO 27001:20221. Verifying training can help the organisation to assess whether the staff have acquired the necessary knowledge, skills, and behaviour to perform their roles and responsibilities in relation to information security. Verifying training can also help the organisation to identify any gaps or weaknesses in the training program and to plan for improvement actions.
• F. This phrase applies to ‘check’ in the PDCA cycle because it involves examining and reviewing the performance and conformity of the processes that were implemented in the ‘do’ phase. Auditing is a systematic, independent, and documented process for obtaining objective evidence and evaluating it to determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled2. Auditing processes can help the organisation to verify whether the information security objectives and requirements are met, whether the information security controls are effective and efficient, and whether the information security risks are adequately managed. Auditing processes can also help the organisation to identify any nonconformities or opportunities for improvement and to plan for corrective or preventive actions.

References:

1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, clause 7.2 2: ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 3.2

This scenario presents a risk related to the sample size. Examining only 15 out of 50 employee training records may not provide a fully representative view of the entire organization's adherence to the training and awareness requirements of ISO/IEC 27001. There is a risk that this sample size is not sufficient to justify a general conclusion about the entire organization.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

SendPay's inability to restore their services immediately after the contract termination indicates a lack of a comprehensive business continuity plan that addresses the potential impacts of such terminations. This oversight can result in significant operational disruptions, as observed.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Clause A.17 (Information security aspects of business continuity management)

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.2, information security objectives are the specific results that an organisation intends to achieve with its information security management system (ISMS). The standard specifies that information security objectives must fulfil the following criteria:

• They must be communicated appropriately (A): The organisation must ensure that the relevant internal and external parties are informed about the information security objectives and their roles and responsibilities in achieving them. This can help to create awareness, commitment, and accountability for information security. This criterion is related to clause 6.2.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• They must be available as documented information (B): The organisation must maintain and retain documented information on the information security objectives, including their scope, level, indicators, and time frame. This can help to provide evidence, traceability, and consistency for information security. This criterion is related to clause 6.2.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• They must be consistent with the IS Policy (G): The organisation must ensure that the information security objectives are aligned with the information security policy, which is the top-level statement of the organisation’s intentions and direction for information security. This can help to support the strategic objectives and the context of the organisation. This criterion is related to clause 5.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.
• They must be achievable (H): The organisation must ensure that the information security objectives are realistic and attainable, considering the available resources, capabilities, and constraints. This can help to avoid setting unrealistic or unfeasible expectations and to monitor and measure the progress and performance of information security. This criterion is related to clause 6.2.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements1
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor2
• ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor - PECB3
• ISO 27001:2022 certified ISMS lead auditor - Jisc4
• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Transition Training Course5
• ISO 27001 - Information Security Lead Auditor Course - PwC Training Academy6

According to ISO/IEC 27001, the scope of an ISMS must be defined and documented. This documentation should include the boundaries and applicability of the information security management system, which helps in defining what information, locations, and assets are covered under the ISMS.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Clause 4.3 (Determining the scope of the information security management system)

Based on the understanding of follow-up audits, especially in the context of Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) and the guidelines provided by ISO 19011:2018, here are the four questions from your list that the auditor in training has answered correctly:

B. Q: Should follow-up audits seek to ensure nonconformities have been effectively addressed? A: YES This is correct. The primary purpose of follow-up audits is to verify that nonconformities identified in previous audits have been effectively addressed and the corrective actions taken are suitable and effective.

D. Q: Is the purpose of a follow-up audit to verify the completion of corrections, corrective actions, and opportunities for improvement? A: YES Yes, the follow-up audit aims to verify the completion and effectiveness of corrections and corrective actions. It may also consider the implementation of opportunities for improvement identified during the initial audit.

E. Q: Are follow-up audits required for all audits? A: NO This is correct. Follow-up audits are not automatically required for all audits. They are typically conducted when nonconformities or other significant issues were identified in an earlier audit and there's a need to verify the implementation and effectiveness of the corrective actions.

H. Q: Could an outcome from a follow-up audit be another follow-up audit if required? A: YES Yes, this is a possible outcome. If the follow-up audit finds that the corrective actions have not been fully effective, or if new issues are identified, it may be necessary to conduct another follow-up audit.

The other responses provided by the auditor in training require some clarification or correction. For instance, while a follow-up audit primarily focuses on previously identified nonconformities and corrective actions, it can still identify new nonconformities if observed (A). Opportunities for improvement are generally considered in the scope of regular audits more so than in follow-up audits, which are more narrowly focused on corrective actions (C). Also, the outcomes of follow-up audits should typically be reported to both the audit team leader and the audit client (F and G), ensuring transparency and accountability.

 The four questions that the auditor in training has answered correctly are B, D, E, and H. These questions and answers are consistent with the definition and purpose of a follow-up audit as specified in ISO 19011:2018, Clause 6.712. A follow-up audit is conducted to verify the completion and effectiveness of corrective actions taken as a result of a previous audit (B, D). Follow-up audits are not mandatory for all audits, but they may be required by the audit program, the audit client, or other interested parties (E). The outcome of a follow-up audit may be another follow-up audit if the corrective actions are not satisfactory or not completed within the agreed time frame (H). The other questions and answers are either incorrect or irrelevant. A follow-up audit should not seek to identify new nonconformities, as this is not its objective (A). Follow-up audits should consider agreed opportunities for improvement as well as corrective actions, as they are both outputs of a previous audit ©. The outcome of a follow-up audit should be reported to the audit client, as well as to other relevant parties, such as the audit team leader who carried out the previous audit (F, G). References: 1: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 6.7 \n2: PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Exam Preparation Guide, Domain 6: Closing an ISO/IEC 27001 audit

ISO/IEC 27001 does not mandate the use of a specific risk assessment methodology. Organizations are free to choose their own approach as long as it is systematic, consistent, and capable of producing valid and comparable results. This allows organizations, such as the marketing agency in the question, to adapt the methodology to suit their specific needs and business context, provided it complies with the requirements set out in the standard.

References: PECB ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Course Materials; ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Clause 6.1.2.

A vulnerability is a weakness in an information system, system security procedures, internal controls, or implementation that could be exploited by a threat source. In this case, not checking the source code of an updated application can lead to unauthorized modifications, thus representing a vulnerability that may impact the integrity of the information, as integrity refers to the accuracy and completeness of the information. References: = The explanation aligns with the general principles of information security management systems and the content typically covered in ISMS ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor training and certification programs, which include understanding vulnerabilities and their impact on information security attributes like integrity.

Integrity is one of the basic components of information security, along with confidentiality and availability. Integrity means that information is safeguarded from unauthorized or accidental changes that could affect its accuracy and completeness. Integrity ensures that information is reliable and trustworthy3. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Training Course - BSI

In the context of ISO/IEC 27001 audits, the audit team is appointed by the certification body, not by the organization being audited. Data Grid Inc. is responsible for specifying the audit criteria and defining the audit scope, but not for appointing the audit team.

References: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

According to the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) course, the following corrections and corrective actions are expected from ABC in response to the nonconformity:

• B. The Service Manager provides evidence of analysis of the cause of nonconformity and how the ABC evaluates the effectiveness of implemented corrective actions. This is part of the requirement of clause 10.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organization shall determine the causes of nonconformities and evaluate the need for action to ensure that they do not recur or occur elsewhere12. The organization shall also evaluate the effectiveness of any corrective actions taken12.
• F. ABC identifies and checks compliance with all applicable legislation and contractual requirements involving third parties. This is part of the requirement of clause 4.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organization shall determine the external and internal issues that are relevant to its purpose and that affect its ability to achieve the intended outcome(s) of its information security management system12. This includes the legal and contractual requirements related to the information security aspects of the organization’s activities, products and services12.
• G. The Service Manager implements the corrective actions and Customer Service Representatives evaluate the effectiveness of implemented corrective actions. This is part of the requirement of clause 10.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which states that the organization shall implement any action needed and retain documented information as evidence of the results of any action taken12. The organization shall also monitor, measure, analyze and evaluate the information security performance and the effectiveness of the information security management system12.

References:

• 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) course, CQI and IRCA Certified Training, 1
• 2: ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Training Course, PECB, 2