ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Questions and Answers

These two options are not required for audit planning of a certification audit, as they are not relevant to the audit objectives, scope, criteria, and methods. The working experience of the management system representative is not a requirement of ISO/IEC 27001, nor does it affect the conformity or effectiveness of the ISMS. The organisation’s financial statement is not part of the ISMS documentation, nor does it provide evidence of the ISMS performance or improvement. The other options are required for audit planning, as they help to determine the audit activities, resources, schedule, and sampling strategy. References: PECB Candidate Handbook1, page 19-20; ISO 9001 Auditing Practices Group Guidance on2, page 1-2; ISO/IEC 27001:2022 (en)3, clause 9.2.

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

The technical expert can communicate their audit findings to the auditee only through one of the audit team members. This ensures that communications remain coordinated and that the audit team maintains control over the audit process.

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

• D. This statement is true because the audit team leader should communicate the audit plan to the audit client and the auditee, and obtain their approval before conducting the audit12. The audit plan should include the audit objectives, scope, criteria, methods, schedule, resources, roles and responsibilities, and other relevant information12. The audit plan should also be reviewed and updated as necessary during the audit process, and any changes should be agreed upon by the audit team leader, the audit client, and the auditee12. The purpose of reviewing and agreeing on the audit plan is to ensure that the audit is conducted in an efficient and effective manner, and that the audit expectations and requirements are clear and consistent among all parties involved.

References:

1: PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 23 2: ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.4.2

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

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.

According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, an opening meeting is a formal communication between the audit team and the auditee at the start of an audit1. The purpose of the opening meeting is to confirm the audit objectives, scope and criteria, introduce the audit team and their roles, confirm the audit plan and logistics, explain the audit methods and procedures, and establish the communication channels1. Therefore, if the Managing Director of the client organization invites the audit team to view a new company video lasting 45 minutes during the opening meeting of a Stage 2 audit, the audit team leader should respond in a way that does not compromise the effectiveness and efficiency of the audit or create any misunderstanding or conflict with the auditee. Two possible ways to respond are to advise the Managing Director that the audit team has to keep to the planned schedule, as there may be limited time and resources available for the audit; or to suggest that the video could be viewed during a refreshment break, if it is relevant and useful for the audit and does not interfere with other audit activities1. The other options are not appropriate responses for the audit team leader to make in this situation. For example, stating that the audit team leader will stay behind after the opening meeting to view the video on behalf of the team may imply that the video is not important or relevant for the rest of the audit team; inviting the Managing Director to the auditors’ hotel for a viewing that evening may create an impression of bias or favouritism; stating that the audit team will make a decision on the viewing at a later time may be vague or indecisive; and advising the Managing Director that the audit team agrees to his request may result in wasting valuable audit time or losing focus on the audit objectives1. References: ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems

The evidence provided by SendPay, which is solely verbal confirmation about the monitoring of outsourced operations, is not considered reliable under ISO/IEC 27001. The standard requires documented evidence to support claims of effective monitoring and control over outsourced processes.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Clause A.15 (Supplier relationships)

In the Act phase of the PDCA cycle, the process is reviewed and evaluated based on the results from the Check phase. The actions taken in this phase aim to continually improve the process performance by addressing the root causes of problems, implementing corrective and preventive actions, and updating the process documentation1. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) | CQI | IRCA

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)

According to ISO 27001:2022 clause 8.1.4, the organisation shall ensure that externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system are controlled. This includes implementing appropriate contractual requirements related to information security with external providers, such as customers who send ICT equipment for reclamation12

In this case, the organisation offers ICT reclamation services, which involves processing customer ICT equipment that may contain sensitive or confidential information. The organisation should have a process in place to ensure that the customer ICT equipment is handled securely and in accordance with the customer’s information security requirements. The process should include steps such as verifying the customer’s identity and authorisation, checking the inventory and condition of the equipment, removing or destroying any labels or stickers that contain information about the equipment or the customer, wiping or erasing any data stored on the equipment, and documenting the actions taken and the results achieved12

The fact that the auditor noticed two servers on a bench with stickers that reveal the server’s name, IP address and admin password indicates that the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security is not effective or not followed. This could pose a risk of unauthorised access, disclosure, or modification of the customer’s information or systems. Therefore, the auditor should note the audit finding and check the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security, and determine whether there is a nonconformity with clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:202212

The other actions are not appropriate for the following reasons:

• A. Asking the ICT Manager to record an information security incident and initiate the information security incident management process is not appropriate because this is not an information security incident that affects the organisation’s own information or systems. An information security incident is defined as a single or a series of unwanted or unexpected information security events that have a significant probability of compromising business operations and threatening information security12 In this case, the information security event affects the customer’s information or systems, not the organisation’s. Therefore, the organisation should follow the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security, not the process for information security incident management.
• C. Recording what the auditor has seen in the audit findings, but taking no further action is not appropriate because this would not address the root cause or the impact of the issue. The auditor has a responsibility to verify the effectiveness and compliance of the organisation’s information security management system, and to report any nonconformities or opportunities for improvement12 Therefore, the auditor should check the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security, and determine whether there is a nonconformity with clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022.
• D. Raising a nonconformity against control 5.31 Legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements is not appropriate because this control is not relevant to the issue. Control 5.31 requires the organisation to identify and comply with the legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements that are applicable to the information security management system12 In this case, the issue is not about the organisation’s compliance with the legal, statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements, but about the organisation’s control of the externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system. Therefore, the auditor should check the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security, and determine whether there is a nonconformity with clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022.
• E. Raising a nonconformity against control 8.20 'network security’ (networks and network devices shall be secured, managed and controlled to protect information in systems and applications) is not appropriate because this control is not relevant to the issue. Control 8.20 requires the organisation to secure, manage and control its own networks and network devices to protect the information in its systems and applications12 In this case, the issue is not about the organisation’s network security, but about the organisation’s control of the externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system. Therefore, the auditor should check the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security, and determine whether there is a nonconformity with clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022.
• F. Asking the auditee to remove the labels, then carry on with the audit is not appropriate because this would not address the root cause or the impact of the issue. The auditor should not interfere with the auditee’s operations or suggest corrective actions during the audit, as this would compromise the auditor’s objectivity and impartiality12 The auditor should check the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security, and determine whether there is a nonconformity with clause 8.1.4 of ISO 27001:2022.

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

It is acceptable and often necessary for auditors to test technical controls such as firewalls to validate the operation and effectiveness of these processes during an ISMS audit. This hands-on testing provides concrete, technical evidence of the security measures' performance.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Clause A.13 (Communications security), ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems

Auditors have the authority to object or even refuse an audit mandate if they believe that the audit duration proposed by the auditee is not sufficient to thoroughly assess the ISMS. It is crucial for the audit to be comprehensive enough to cover all necessary aspects of the system, ensuring its effectiveness and compliance.

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

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)

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)

• Review is the third stage of the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle, which is a four-step model for implementing and improving an information security management system (ISMS) according to ISO/IEC 27001:202212. Review involves assessing and measuring the performance of the ISMS against the established policies, objectives, and criteria12.
• Assess is the verb that describes the action of reviewing the ISMS. Assess means to evaluate, analyze, or measure something in a systematic and objective manner3. Assessing the ISMS involves collecting and verifying audit evidence, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and determining the degree of conformity or nonconformity12.
• Regular is the adjective that describes the frequency or interval of reviewing the ISMS. Regular means occurring or done at fixed or uniform intervals4. Reviewing the ISMS at regular intervals means conducting internal audits and management reviews periodically, such as annually, quarterly, or monthly, depending on the needs and risks of the organization12.
• Suitability is one of the attributes that describes the quality or outcome of reviewing the ISMS. Suitability means being appropriate or fitting for a particular purpose, person, or situation5. Reviewing the ISMS for suitability means ensuring that it is aligned with the organization’s strategic direction, business objectives, and information security requirements12.

References :=

• 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
• Assess | Definition of Assess by Merriam-Webster
• Regular | Definition of Regular by Merriam-Webster
• Suitability | Definition of Suitability by Merriam-Webster

 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.

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)

A screenshot of a computer Description automatically generated

• Identifying the source of information (already given)
• Gathering audit evidence: This involves collecting information from various sources such as documents, records, interviews, and observations.
• Sampling the available data: Due to the vast amount of information available, auditors typically use sampling techniques to select representative data for closer scrutiny.
• Verifying objective evidence: This involves checking the accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the collected evidence.
• Evaluating evidence against the audit criteria: Auditors compare the collected evidence to the established criteria (e.g., standards, policies, procedures) to assess compliance and effectiveness.
• Recording audit findings: This involves documenting the results of the evaluation, including observations, conclusions, and recommendations.
• Making audit conclusions: Based on the recorded findings, auditors formulate overall conclusions about the status of the management system.

Therefore, the correct sequence is:

1. Identifying the source of information 2. Gathering audit evidence 3. Sampling the available data 4. Verifying objective evidence 5. Evaluating evidence against the audit criteria 6. Recording audit findings 7. Making audit conclusions

The overall competence of the12:

• The audit scope and criteria: The audit scope defines the extent and boundaries of the audit, such as the locations, processes, functions, and time period to be audited. The audit criteria are the set of policies, procedures, standards, or requirements used as a reference against which the audit evidence is compared. The audit scope and criteria determine the complexity and extent of the audit, and thus influence the number and expertise of the auditors needed to cover all the relevant aspects of the audit.
• The overall competence of the audit team needed to achieve audit objectives: The audit team should have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to conduct the audit effectively and efficiently, and to provide credible and reliable audit results. The audit team competence should include the following elements12:

The person responsible for managing the audit programme should not consider the following factors when deciding the size and composition of the audit team for a specific audit, as they are either irrelevant or inappropriate for the audit process12:

• Customer relationships: The audit team should not be influenced by any personal or professional relationships with the auditee or other interested parties, as this may compromise the objectivity and impartiality of the audit. The audit team should avoid any conflicts of interest or self-interest that may affect the audit results or the audit decisions.
• Seniority of the audit team leader: The audit team leader should be selected based on their competence and experience, not on their seniority or rank within the organization or the audit programme. The audit team leader should have the authority and responsibility to manage the audit team and the audit process, regardless of their seniority or position.
• The cost of the audit: The cost of the audit should not be the primary factor for determining the size and composition of the audit team, as this may compromise the quality and effectiveness of the audit. The audit team should have sufficient resources and time to conduct the audit in accordance with the audit objectives, scope, and criteria, and to provide accurate and reliable audit results and recommendations.
• The duration preferred by the auditee: The duration of the audit should be based on the audit objectives, scope, and criteria, and the availability and cooperation of the auditee, not on the preference or convenience of the auditee. The audit team should have enough time to conduct the audit in a thorough and systematic manner, and to collect and evaluate sufficient and relevant audit evidence.

References:

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

A first-party audit is an internal audit in which the organization’s own staff or contractors check the conformity and effectiveness of the ISMS. A certification body auditor and an audit team from an accreditation body are external auditors who conduct audits for the purpose of certification or accreditation. They do not participate in a first-party audit, but rather in a third-party audit. References: First & Second Party Audits - operational services, The ISO 27001 Audit Process | Blog | OneTrust, The ISO 27001 Audit Process | A Beginner’s Guide - IAS USA

Leadership and commitment is a key requirement of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, as it establishes the top management’s role and responsibility in establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving the ISMS. Without assessing this aspect, the audit team cannot conclude that the ISMS is effective and conforms to the standard. Therefore, the audit team leader should advise the auditee and audit client that it is not possible to make a positive recommendation at this point, and explain the reason and the implications. The audit team leader should also consult with the certification body and the audit programme manager on the next steps, such as extending the audit duration, conducting a follow-up audit, or issuing a conditional certification, depending on the certification body’s policy and the audit client’s agreement. References: =

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 5, Leadership
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 19, Audit Process
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 22, Audit Report
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 23, Audit Conclusion and Recommendation

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, a correction is an action to eliminate a detected nonconformity, such as rework, repair, or replacement1. The examples of A, B, C, and E are corrections because they fix the errors or defects that caused the nonconformities, such as a missing signature, a missing guide, a wrong date, or a wrong colour code. The other examples (D, F, G, and H) are not corrections, but corrective actions, because they address the root causes of the nonconformities, such as inadequate training, poor planning, ineffective documentation, or unclear responsibility2. References: 1: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 35, section 4.5.12: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 36, section 4.5.2.

The word that best completes the sentence is “demonstrate”. According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Clause 7.5, the organization shall retain documented information as evidence of the performance of the processes and the conformity of the products and services with the requirements1. The purpose of retaining documented information is to demonstrate conformity with the requirements of the management system standard, not to maintain, audit, or certify it. References: 1: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Clause 7.5

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook1, one of the principles of auditing is confidentiality, which means that auditors should respect the confidentiality of information obtained during the audit and not disclose it to unauthorized parties. The handbook also states that auditors should only report audit results to those who have a legitimate need to know, such as the client, the auditee, and the certification body. Therefore, sharing the findings with other relevant managers in A or B’s other customers would be a breach of confidentiality, as they are not directly involved in the audit process or the information security management system of B. Sharing the findings with B’s Information Security Manager or other relevant managers in B would be appropriate, as they are part of the auditee organization and responsible for the implementation and improvement of the ISMS. Sharing the findings with A’s supplier evaluation team or B’s certification body would also be acceptable, as they have a legitimate need to know the audit results for the purpose of supplier selection or certification, respectively. References: 1: PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 7-8.

The benefits of implementing an ISMS primarily result from a reduction in information security risks. E. The purpose of an ISMS is to apply a risk management process for preserving information security. Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation: According to the ISO 27001 standard, the benefits of implementing an ISMS include the following1:

• Assuring customers and other stakeholders of the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information
• Enhancing the ability to respond to information security incidents and minimize their impacts
• Improving the governance and management of information security
• Reducing the costs and losses associated with information security breaches
• Increasing the competitiveness and reputation of the organization
• Complying with legal, regulatory and contractual obligations The purpose of an ISMS is to provide a systematic approach to managing information security risks, based on the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle1. The ISMS enables the organization to establish, implement, maintain and continually improve its information security performance, in alignment with its business objectives and the needs and expectations of interested parties1. The ISMS consists of the following elements1:
• The information security policy and objectives
• The scope and boundaries of the ISMS
• The processes and procedures for information security risk assessment and treatment
• The resources and competencies for information security
• The roles and responsibilities for information security
• The performance evaluation and improvement of the ISMS
• The internal and external communication and awareness of the ISMS References:
• ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, clauses 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 9-11
• ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Information Security Management Standards
• 4 Key Benefits of ISO 27001 Implementation | ISMS.online
• ISO/IEC 27001:2022
• An Introduction to the ISO 27001 ISMS | Secureframe

The audit described in the last paragraph of scenario 9 is a surveillance audit. This type of audit is conducted periodically to ensure that the certified ISMS continues to fulfill the requirements of the standard after the initial certification.

The conclusion in the audit report that is not required by the certification body when deciding to grant certification is that the organisation fully complies with all legal and other requirements applicable to the ISMS. This is because the certification body does not have the authority or the responsibility to verify the legal compliance of the organisation, as this is outside the scope of ISO/IEC 27001:2022. The certification body only evaluates the conformity of the organisation’s ISMS with the requirements of the standard, which include the establishment of a process to identify and evaluate the legal and other requirements that are relevant to the ISMS. The organisation is responsible for ensuring its own legal compliance and for providing evidence of such compliance to the certification body if requested. References: = ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1.3; ISO/IEC 27006:2022, clause 9.2.2.4; PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 29.

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

Yes, a change in the scope should be initiated because outsourcing a significant part of the service, such as technical support related to web hosting, could impact the risk landscape and the controls needed to manage those risks. This change affects the external environment and how the ISMS operates, necessitating a scope review and possible adjustment.

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

competence of the audit team and decision made by the certification body

According to ISO/IEC 17021-1, which specifies the requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems, an accredited certification means that the certification body has been evaluated by an accreditation body against recognized standards to demonstrate its competence, impartiality and performance capability1. Therefore, an accredited certification assures the competence of the audit team that conducts the audit in accordance with ISO 19011 and ISO/IEC 27001:2022, and the decision made by the certification body that grants or maintains the certification based on the audit evidence and findings2. References: ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 - Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems – Part 1: Requirements, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) | CQI | IRCA

The context of the organisation is the business environment in which the organisation operates and defines its information security management system (ISMS). It includes the internal and external factors and conditions that can influence the organisation’s information security objectives, strategies, and policies. The context of the organisation helps the organisation to identify the scope, boundaries, and requirements of the ISMS, as well as the interested parties and their expectations. The context of the organisation is determined by considering both internal and external issues, such as the organisational structure, culture, values, mission, vision, objectives, strategies, resources, capabilities, processes, activities, products, services, markets, customers, competitors, suppliers, partners, regulators, laws, regulations, standards, guidelines, best practices, risks, opportunities, threats, vulnerabilities, etc. References: ISO 27001:2022 Clause 4 Context of the organization, ISO 27001 Requirement 4.1 – Understanding the Context of the Organisation, ISO 27001 context of the organization – How to define it - Advisera

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.

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

Yes, Jack should communicate such situations to the certification body. It is essential for auditors to report potential nonconformities and ethical breaches to the certification body to maintain the integrity and credibility of the audit process, without necessarily informing top management of these steps.

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

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), clause 6.2 requires an organization to establish information security objectives at relevant functions and levels1. The objectives should be consistent with the information security policy; measurable (if practicable) or capable of being evaluated; monitored; communicated; updated as appropriate1. Therefore, when auditing an organization’s information security objectives, an ISMS auditor should verify these aspects in accordance with the audit criteria.

Three responses from the ISMS auditor in training that would cause concern in relation to conformity with ISO/IEC 27001:2022 are:

• I am going to check that top management have determined the Information Security objectives for the current year. If not, I will check that this task has been programmed to be completed: This response would cause concern because it implies that the auditor in training is not aware of the requirement to establish information security objectives at relevant functions and levels, not just at the top management level. It also implies that the auditor in training is willing to accept a delay or postponement in determining the information security objectives, which may affect the ISMS performance and effectiveness.
• I am going to check that the Information Security objectives are written down on paper so that everyone is clear on what needs to be achieved, how it will be achieved, and by when it will be achieved: This response would cause concern because it implies that the auditor in training is not aware of the requirement to establish information security objectives that are measurable (if practicable) or capable of being evaluated, not just written down on paper. It also implies that the auditor in training is not aware of the flexibility and suitability of different media or formats for documenting and communicating information security objectives, such as electronic or digital records, posters, newsletters, etc.
• I am going to check that a completion date has been set for each objective and that there are no objectives with missing ‘achieve by’ dates: This response would cause concern because it implies that the auditor in training is not aware of the requirement to establish information security objectives that are monitored, not just completed by a certain date. It also implies that the auditor in training is not aware of the possibility and necessity of updating information security objectives as appropriate, such as when changes occur in the internal or external context of the organization, or when new risks or opportunities arise.

The other responses from the ISMS auditor in training are acceptable and do not cause concern in relation to conformity with ISO/IEC 27001:2022. For example, checking how each Information Security objective has been communicated to those who need to be aware of it in order for the objective to be achieved is relevant to verifying the communication aspect of clause 6.2; checking that there is a process in place to periodically revisit Information Security objectives, with a view to amending or cancelling them if circumstances necessitate this is relevant to verifying the updating aspect of clause 6.2; checking that the necessary budget, manpower and materials to achieve each objective has been determined is relevant to verifying the planning aspect of clause 6.2; checking that all the Information Security objectives are measurable. If they are not measurable the organisation will not be able to track progress against them is relevant to verifying the measurability aspect of clause 6.2. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), control A.7.2 requires an organization to implement appropriate physical entry controls to prevent unauthorized access to secure areas1. The organization should define and document the criteria for granting and revoking access rights to secure areas, and should monitor and record the use of such access rights1. Therefore, when auditing the organization’s application of control A.7.2, an ISMS auditor should verify that these aspects are met in accordance with the audit criteria.

Based on the scenario above, the auditor should raise a nonconformity against control A.7.2, as the secure area is not adequately protected from unauthorized access. The auditor should provide the following evidence and justification for the nonconformity:

• Evidence: The auditor observed two external contractors using a swipe card and combination number provided by the centre’s reception desk to gain access to a client’s suite to carry out authorized electrical repairs. The auditor checked the door access record for the client’s suite and found that only one card was swiped. The auditor asked the receptionist and was told that it was a common problem that contractors tend to swipe one card and tailgate their way in, but they were known from the reception sign-in.
• Justification: This evidence indicates that the organization has not implemented appropriate physical entry controls to prevent unauthorized access to secure areas, as required by control A.7.2. The organization has not defined and documented the criteria for granting and revoking access rights to secure areas, as there is no verification or authorization process for providing swipe cards and combination numbers to external contractors. The organization has not monitored and recorded the use of access rights to secure areas, as there is no mechanism to ensure that each individual swipes their card and enters their combination number before entering a secure area. The organization has relied on the reception sign-in as a means of identification, which is not sufficient or reliable for ensuring information security.

The other options are not valid actions for auditing control A.7.2, as they are not related to the control or its requirements, or they are not appropriate or effective for addressing the nonconformity. For example:

• Take no action: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor ignores or accepts the nonconformity, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems.
• Raise a nonconformity against control A.5.20 ‘addressing information security in supplier relationships’ as information security requirements have not been agreed upon with the supplier: This option is not valid because it does not address the root cause of the nonconformity, which is related to physical entry controls, not supplier relationships. Control A.5.20 requires an organization to agree on information security requirements with suppliers that may access, process, store, communicate or provide IT infrastructure components for its information assets1. While this control may be relevant for ensuring information security in supplier relationships, it does not address the issue of unauthorized access to secure areas by external contractors.
• Raise a nonconformity against control A.7.6 ‘working in secure areas’ as security measures for working in secure areas have not been defined: This option is not valid because it does not address the root cause of the nonconformity, which is related to physical entry controls, not working in secure areas. Control A.7.6 requires an organization to define and apply security measures for working in secure areas1. While this control may be relevant for ensuring information security when working in secure areas, it does not address the issue of unauthorized access to secure areas by external contractors.
• Determine whether any additional effective arrangements are in place to verify individual access to secure areas e.g. CCTV: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather attempts to find alternative or compensating controls that may mitigate its impact or likelihood. While additional arrangements such as CCTV may be useful for verifying individual access to secure areas, they do not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.
• Raise an opportunity for improvement that contractors must be accompanied at all times when accessing secure facilities: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather suggests a possible improvement action that may prevent or reduce its recurrence or severity. While accompanying contractors at all times when accessing secure facilities may be a good practice for ensuring information security, it does not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.
• Raise an opportunity for improvement to have a large sign in reception reminding everyone requiring access must use their swipe card at all times: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather suggests a possible improvement action that may increase awareness or compliance with the existing controls. While having a large sign in reception reminding everyone requiring access must use their swipe card at all times may be a helpful reminder for ensuring information security, it does not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.
• Tell the organisation they must write to their contractors, reminding them of the need to use access cards appropriately: This option is not valid because it does not address or resolve the nonconformity, but rather instructs the organization to take a corrective action that may not be effective or sufficient for ensuring information security. While writing to contractors, reminding them of the need to use access cards appropriately may be a communication measure for ensuring information security, it does not replace or substitute the requirement for appropriate physical entry controls as specified by control A.7.2.

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

The following four statements are true according to ISO/IEC 27001’s risk management requirements: 12

• The results of risk assessments must be maintained. This is true because clause 8.2.3 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organisation to retain documented information of the information security risk assessment process and the results12
• ISO/IEC 27001 provides an outline approach for the management of risk. This is true because clause 6.1.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 specifies the general steps for the information security risk management process, which include establishing the risk criteria, assessing the risks, treating the risks, and monitoring and reviewing the risks12
• The organisation must produce a risk treatment plan for every business risk identified. This is true because clause 6.1.3 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organisation to produce a risk treatment plan that defines the actions to be taken to address the unacceptable risks, the responsibilities, the expected dates, and the resources required12
• Risk assessments should be undertaken following significant changes. This is true because clause 8.2.4 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organisation to review and update the risk assessment at planned intervals or when significant changes occur12

The following four statements are false according to ISO/IEC 27001’s risk management requirements:

• Risk identification is used to determine the severity of an information security risk. This is false because risk identification is used to identify the assets, threats, vulnerabilities, and existing controls that are relevant to the information security risk management process. The severity of an information security risk is determined by the risk analysis, which evaluates the likelihood and impact of the risk scenarios12
• The organisation must operate a risk treatment process to eliminate its information security risks. This is false because the organisation can choose from four options to treat its information security risks: avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept. The organisation does not have to eliminate all its information security risks, but only those that are unacceptable according to its risk criteria12
• The initial phase in an organisation’s risk management process should be information security risk assessment. This is false because the initial phase in an organisation’s risk management process should be establishing the risk management framework, which includes defining the risk management policy, objectives, scope, roles, responsibilities, and criteria. The information security risk assessment is the second phase in the risk management process12
• Risks assessments should be undertaken at monthly intervals. This is false because there is no fixed frequency for conducting risk assessments in ISO/IEC 27001. The organisation should determine the appropriate intervals for reviewing and updating the risk assessment based on its risk appetite, risk profile, and operational context12

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 standard definition of ISMS is a systematic approach for establishing, implementing, operating, monitoring, reviewing, maintaining and improving an organization’s information security to achieve business objectives. This definition is given in clause 3.17 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, and it describes the main components and purpose of an ISMS. An ISMS is not a project-based approach, as it is an ongoing process that requires continual improvement. An ISMS is not a company wide business objective, as it is a management system that supports the organization’s objectives. An ISMS is not an information security systematic approach, as it is a broader concept that encompasses the organization’s context, risks, controls, and performance. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 15. : ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 3.17.

A sampling plan for the audit is a method of selecting a representative subset of the audit evidence to evaluate the conformity of the ISMS1. The advantages of using a sampling plan are:

• It reduces the audit duration by focusing on the most relevant and significant aspects of the ISMS2.
• It gives confidence in the audit results by ensuring that the sample is sufficient, reliable, and unbiased3.

References: 1: ISMS Auditing Guideline - ISO27000, page 9; 2: Internal Audit Plan – ISO Templates and Documents Download; 3: A Step-by-Step Guide to Conducting an ISO 27001 Internal Audit, Step 4; : ISMS Auditing Guideline - ISO27000; : Internal Audit Plan – ISO Templates and Documents Download; : A Step-by-Step Guide to Conducting an ISO 27001 Internal Audit

Signing the certification agreement, which should clearly outline the audit objectives, scope, and responsibilities, would help prevent misunderstandings between the certification body and Data Grid Inc. A well-defined agreement ensures both parties have a clear understanding of what the audit will entail and what outputs are expected.

References: ISO/IEC 27006:2015, Information technology — Security techniques — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems

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?

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), clause 4.1 requires an organization to determine external and internal issues that are relevant to its purpose and that affect its ability to achieve the intended outcomes of its ISMS2. External issues are those that originate from outside the organization, such as legal, regulatory, cultural, social, political, economic, natural and competitive factors2. Internal issues are those that originate from within the organization, such as governance, structure, roles and responsibilities, policies, objectives, culture, capabilities, resources and information systems2. Therefore, based on this definition, four examples of external issues in the context of a management system to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 are a rise in interest rates in response to high inflation (which affects the economic environment of the organization), a reduction in grants as a result of a change in government policy (which affects the political and legal environment of the organization), higher labour costs as a result of an aging population (which affects the social and demographic environment of the organization), and inability to source raw materials due to government sanctions (which affects the trade and supply environment of the organization)2. The other options are examples of internal issues, as they originate from within the organization or its activities. For example, poor levels of staff competence as a result of cuts in training expenditure (which affects the capabilities and resources of the organization), increased absenteeism as a result of poor management (which affects the culture and performance of the organization), poor morale as a result of staff holidays being reduced (which affects the motivation and satisfaction of the organization’s personnel), and a fall in productivity linked to outdated production equipment (which affects the efficiency and quality of the organization’s processes)2. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements

The role of the audit team leader does not include setting up an ethics committee. The primary responsibilities of the audit team leader include planning the audit, directing the activities of the audit team, ensuring compliance with the auditing standards, managing conflicts that arise during the audit, and presenting audit conclusions.

References: ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems

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.

Lawsy's lack of specific procedures for the use of laptops outside the workplace, despite allowing such use, represents a nonconformity. ISO/IEC 27001 requires that security controls and management processes be clearly defined, documented, and implemented. Relying solely on employees' common knowledge does not fulfill the standard's requirements for managing information security risks associated with mobile and teleworking.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause A.6.2 (Mobile device and teleworking management)

The three options that would not be valid audit trails are:

•Collect more evidence on how the organisation manages the Point of Contact (PoC) which monitors vulnerabilities. (Relevant to clause 8.1)

•Collect more evidence on whether terms and definitions are contained in the information security policy. (Relevant to control 5.32)

•Collect more evidence to determine if ISO 27035 (Information security incident management) is used as internal audit criteria. (Relevant to clause 8.13)

These options are not valid audit trails because they are not directly related to the information security incident management process, which is the focus of the audit. The audit trails should be relevant to the objectives, scope, and criteria of the audit, and should provide sufficient and reliable evidence to support the audit findings and conclusions1.

Option E is not valid because the PoC is not a part of the information security incident management process, but rather a role that is responsible for reporting and escalating information security incidents to the appropriate authorities2. The audit trail should focus on how the PoC performs this function, not how the organisation manages the PoC.

Option G is not valid because the terms and definitions are not a part of the information security incident management process, but rather a part of the information security policy, which is a high-level document that defines the organisation’s information security objectives, principles, and responsibilities3. The audit trail should focus on how the information security policy is communicated, implemented, and reviewed, not whether it contains terms and definitions.

Option H is not valid because ISO 27035 is not a part of the information security incident management process, but rather a guidance document that provides best practices for managing information security incidents4. The audit trail should focus on how the organisation follows the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 for information security incident management, not whether it uses ISO 27035 as an internal audit criteria.

The other options are valid audit trails because they are related to the information security incident management process, and they can provide useful evidence to evaluate the conformity and effectiveness of the process. For example:

•Option A is valid because it relates to control A.5.29, which requires the organisation to establish procedures to isolate and quarantine areas subject to information security incidents, in order to prevent further damage and preserve evidence5. The audit trail should collect evidence on how the organisation implements and tests these procedures, and how they ensure the continuity of information security during disruption.

•Option B is valid because it relates to control A.6.8, which requires the organisation to establish mechanisms for reporting information security events and weaknesses, and to ensure that they are communicated in a timely manner to the appropriate levels within the organisation6. The audit trail should collect evidence on how the organisation defines and uses these mechanisms, and how they monitor and review the reporting process.

•Option C is valid because it relates to clause 7.2, which requires the organisation to provide information security awareness, education, and training to all persons under its control, and to evaluate the effectiveness of these activities7. The audit trail should collect evidence on how the organisation identifies the information security training needs, how they deliver and record the training, and how they measure the learning outcomes and feedback.

•Option D is valid because it relates to control A.5.27, which requires the organisation to learn from information security incidents and to implement corrective actions to prevent recurrence or reduce impact8. The audit trail should collect evidence on how the organisation analyses and documents the root causes and consequences of information security incidents, how they identify and implement corrective actions, and how they verify the effectiveness of these actions.

•Option F is valid because it relates to control A.5.30, which requires the organisation to establish and maintain a business continuity plan to ensure the availability of information and information processing facilities in the event of a severe information security incident9. The audit trail should collect evidence on how the organisation develops and updates the business continuity plan, how they test and review the plan, and how they communicate and train the relevant personnel on the plan.

References: 1: ISO 19011:2018, 6.2; 2: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.6.8.1; 3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 5.2; 4: ISO/IEC 27035:2016, Introduction; 5: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.5.29; 6: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.6.8; 7: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, 7.2; 8: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.5.27; 9: ISO/IEC 27001:2022, A.5.30; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27035:2016; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022; : ISO/IEC 27001:2022

By using illegal versions of software, NightCore ignored the control about intellectual property rights under Annex A.8.1.1 of ISO/IEC 27001, which requires the protection of organizational records to include intellectual property and personal information held in the form of data or software.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Standard, Annex A.8.1.1 (Responsibility for assets)

The use of probability theory in the sample selection process indicates that "statistical sampling" was used. Statistical sampling allows auditors to make inferences about the population based on the properties of the sample, relying on the principles of probability to select representative elements.

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

The Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle is a four-step method for implementing and improving processes, products, or services. The “plan” phase involves establishing the objectives and processes necessary to deliver the desired results. This may include setting SMART goals, identifying resources, defining roles and responsibilities, conducting risk assessments, and developing plans for training, communication, and monitoring.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) objectives and content from Quality.org and PECB
• ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems [Section 5.3.1]

A screenshot of a chat Description automatically generated

The correct sequence of activities for the management of information security risk in accordance with the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 is as follows:

1st: Create and maintain information security risk criteria 2nd: Identify the risks that need to be considered when planning for the information security management system 3rd: Assess the potential consequences that would arise if the risk were to materialise 4th: Select appropriate risk treatment options 5th: Carry out information security risk assessments at planned intervals 6th: Consider the results of risk assessment and the status of the risk treatment plan at management review

This sequence is based on the information security risk management process described in ISO/IEC 27001:2022 clause 6.1, which 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.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 6.1
• [PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor], pages 14-15
• ISO 27001 Risk Management in Plain English

The audit report is a confidential document that contains sensitive information about the auditee’s ISMS and its performance. The audit team has a duty to protect the confidentiality of the audit report and only disclose it to authorized parties, such as the audit client, the certification body, and the accreditation body. Therefore, the following responses are false:

• A: The audit team cannot decide to release the report to third parties without the consent of the audit client, as this would breach the confidentiality agreement and the audit code of conduct. The audit team should always inform the audit client before disclosing the report to any third party, and obtain their explicit, prior approval.
• F: Not every auditor employed by the auditing organization can access the audit report, as this would violate the principle of need-to-know. Only auditors who are involved in the audit process, such as the audit team leader, the audit team members, the audit programme manager, and the certification decision maker, can access the audit report. Other auditors who are not related to the audit have no legitimate reason to access the report, and should be prevented from doing so by appropriate security measures.
• G: The duty of confidentiality does not expire after a certain period of time, as this would compromise the trust and integrity of the audit process. The audit report remains confidential indefinitely, unless there is a legal or contractual obligation to disclose it, or the audit client agrees to release it. Third parties cannot access the audit report by making a subject access request, as this would infringe the privacy and data protection rights of the audit client and the auditee.
• H: Subcontracted auditors are not considered to be third parties regarding confidentiality, as they are part of the audit team and have a contractual relationship with the auditing organization. Subcontracted auditors are typically bound by the same confidentiality agreement and audit code of conduct as the employed auditors, and have the same rights and responsibilities to access and protect the audit report.

References: =

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 9.2, Internal audit
• ISO/IEC 27006:2015, clause 7.2.3, Confidentiality
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 22, Audit Report
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 24, Audit Code of Conduct

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.

A property of information that has the ability to prove occurrence of a claimed event is integrity. 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. Integrity also implies that information and systems can be verified and validated as authentic and accurate. Electronic chain letters are not a property of information, but a type of spam or hoax message that may contain malicious or misleading content. Availability means that service should be accessible at the required time and usable only by the authorized entity. Accessibility is not a property of information, but a characteristic of usability that refers to how easy it is for users to access and interact with information and systems. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 24. : [ISO/IEC 27001 Brochures | PECB], page 4. : [ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB], page 13.

An audit finding is the result of the evaluation of the collected audit evidence against audit criteria.

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 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 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?

• A: Auditors approved for conducting onsite audits do require additional training for virtual audits to ensure they are competent in using the technology and tools required for conducting audits remotely12.
• E: The number of days assigned to a third-party audit is not determined by the auditee’s availability, but rather by factors such as the size and complexity of the organization, the scope of the audit, and the requirements of the certification body34.

References: The answers are verified based on the content and objectives of the ISMS ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor course, as well as the guidelines provided in the reference materials and documents related to the course.

Sinvestment should correct the identified issue related to the lack of documentation on information security training and awareness before the stage 2 audit. Addressing this gap promptly ensures that the ISMS is fully compliant and effective when assessed in the subsequent audit stage.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause 7.2 (Competence)

According to ISO/IEC 17021-1, which specifies the requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems, a certification body should establish criteria for determining audit time and audit team composition based on factors such as the scope of certification, size and complexity of the organization, risks associated with its activities, etc2. Therefore, if an auditee requests to extend the audit scope to include two additional sites after completing Stage 1 of an initial certification audit, the audit team leader should obtain information about the additional sites to inform the certification body, so that they can review and approve the change in scope and adjust the audit time and audit team accordingly2. The other options are not appropriate actions for the audit team leader to take in this situation. For example, increasing the length of the Stage 2 audit to include the extra sites without informing the certification body may violate their procedures and policies; arranging to complete a remote Stage 1 audit of the two sites using a video conferencing platform may not be feasible or effective depending on the nature and location of the sites; and informing the auditee that the request can be accepted but a full Stage 1 audit must be repeated may not be necessary or reasonable if there are no significant changes in the auditee’s ISMS since Stage 12. References: ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 - Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems – Part 1: Requirements

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)

The correct sequence of activities is:

• Establish the management system
• Plan the audit programme
• Conduct internal audits
• Hold a Management Review
• Engage a Certification Body for stage 1 and stage 2 audits
• Complete any corrective actions

Comprehensive but Short Explanation: = According to the PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, the steps for achieving certification are as follows1:

• Establish the management system: This involves defining the scope, objectives, policies, procedures, and controls of the ISMS, as well as ensuring the availability of resources and top management commitment.
• Plan the audit programme: This involves defining the audit objectives, criteria, scope, frequency, methods, and responsibilities for conducting internal audits of the ISMS.
• Conduct internal audits: This involves verifying the conformity and effectiveness of the ISMS, as well as identifying any nonconformities or opportunities for improvement.
• Hold a Management Review: This involves reviewing the performance and suitability of the ISMS, as well as deciding on any changes or actions needed to improve it.
• Engage a Certification Body for stage 1 and stage 2 audits: This involves selecting a reputable and accredited certification body to conduct an external audit of the ISMS, consisting of two stages: a documentation review and an on-site assessment.
• Complete any corrective actions: This involves addressing any nonconformities or findings identified by the certification body, and providing evidence of their implementation and effectiveness.

References: = 1: PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 25-26.

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

The audit objectives are the purpose and scope of an audit, as defined by the audit client and the auditor. According to the ISO/IEC 27001 standard, the audit objectives for an ISMS audit may include determining the extent of conformity of the ISMS with the audit criteria, evaluating the ability of the ISMS to ensure the organization meets its information security objectives, and identifying potential areas for improvement of the ISMS12. References: = 1: PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 192: ISO/IEC 27007:2011 Information technology — Security techniques — Guidelines for information security management systems auditing, clause 4.2.1.

The AES (Advanced Encryption Standard) method is a symmetric-key algorithm, meaning the same key is used for both encrypting and decrypting data1. This type of control is considered preventive because it is implemented to prevent unauthorized access to confidential information by ensuring that the data is unreadable to anyone who does not have the key. References: = The explanation is based on the general understanding of encryption as a security control within the field of information security, particularly as it pertains to the ISO/IEC 27001 standard for information security management systems (ISMS), which includes encryption as a preventive control measure.

“In a third-party audit an observation can indicate conformity at organisation is not required to take action.”

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook1, an observation is “a statement of fact made during an audit and substantiated by objective evidence”. An observation can indicate conformity or nonconformity, but it does not require any corrective action from the audited organisation. A recommendation, on the other hand, is “a suggestion for improvement based on an observation”. A recommendation may or may not be accepted by the audited organisation.

According to the Fundamentals – Third parties2, a third-party audit is “an audit conducted by an external organisation that has the legal right to audit an organisation’s processes and procedures”. A third-party audit can result in a finding, which is “a conclusion reached by the auditor based on the audit evidence collected”. A finding can be positive or negative, depending on whether the audited organisation meets the audit criteria or not. A nonconformity is “a finding that indicates the non-fulfilment of a requirement”. A nonconformity requires corrective action from the audited organisation to prevent recurrence.

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

The only option that is not prohibited in acceptable use of information assets is C: company-wide e-mails with supervisor/TL permission. This option implies that the sender has obtained the necessary authorization from their supervisor or team leader to send an e-mail to all employees in the organization. This could be done for legitimate business purposes, such as announcing important news, events or updates that are relevant to everyone. However, this option should still be used sparingly and responsibly, as it could cause unnecessary disruption or annoyance to the recipients if abused or misused. The other options are prohibited in acceptable use of information assets, as they could violate the information security policies and procedures of the organization, as well as waste resources and bandwidth. Electronic chain letters (A) are messages that urge recipients to forward them to multiple other people, often with false or misleading claims or promises. They are considered spam and could contain malicious links or attachments that could compromise information security. E-mail copies to non-essential readers (B) are messages that are sent to recipients who do not need to receive them or have no interest in them. They are considered unnecessary and could clutter the inbox and distract the recipients from more important messages. Messages with very large attachments or to a large number of recipients (D) are messages that consume a lot of network resources and could affect the performance or availability of the information systems. They could also exceed the storage capacity or quota limits of the recipients’ mailboxes and cause problems for them. ISO/IEC 27001:2022 requires the organization to implement rules for acceptable use of assets (see clause A.8.1.3). 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 Acceptable Use?

In the context of ISO/IEC 27001, the approval of the risk assessment and the acceptance of the remaining risk levels after treatment are typically responsibilities of the top management. This is because top management is accountable for the information security management system and its outcomes, and they have the authority to accept risks on behalf of the organization12. References: = The information provided is based on the standard practices of ISO/IEC 27001 risk assessment and treatment processes, which emphasize the role of top management in the approval and acceptance of risks

The two true statements are B and E. According to ISO 19011:2022, the audit plan describes the arrangements for a set of one or more audits planned for a specific time frame and directed towards a specific purpose1, while the audit programme describes the activities and arrangements for an audit2. The other options are either false or irrelevant. The responsibility for managing the audit programme rests with the audit programme manager, not the audit team leader (A)3. The audit plan can be changed during the conducting of the audit if necessary, with the agreement of the audit client and the auditee ©4. The audit programme and the audit plan are not the same thing, so D and F are incorrect. References: 1: ISO 19011:2022, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 3.8 \n2: ISO 19011:2022, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 3.9 \n3: ISO 19011:2022, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 5.3.1 \n4: ISO 19011:2022, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 6.4.2

A threat in information security is any circumstance or event with the potential to cause harm to an information system through unauthorized access, destruction, disclosure, modification of data, and/or denial of service. The situation where hackers compromise an administrator’s account by cracking the password represents a direct threat to the security of the information system. References: = This explanation is based on general information security principles and the typical content covered in ISMS ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor training and certification programs. It aligns with the knowledge expected of a professional with an ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor certification

The purpose of a management system audit is to evaluate the performance of an organization’s management system.

A management system audit is an independent and systematic analysis and evaluation of a company’s overall activities and performances1. It is a valuable tool used to determine the efficiency, functions, accomplishments and achievements of the company1. A management system audit can be conducted against a range of audit criteria, including (but not limited to) requirements set of in existing ISO standards2.

According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, the purpose of an audit is to enable the auditor to provide an audit conclusion that is related to the audit objectives2. 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 system2.

Therefore, the correct answer is evaluate, as it best describes the purpose of a management system audit. The other options are not correct because they are not specific enough or do not reflect the intended outcome of an audit. For example, improve implies that the audit itself will enhance the performance of the management system, which is not necessarily true. Manage implies that the audit will control or direct the management system, which is not its role. Research implies that the audit will generate new knowledge or information about the management system, which is not its primary aim.