PECB ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor - PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 2022 Lead Auditor exam

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), control 5.7 requires an organization to establish and maintain a threat intelligence process to identify and evaluate information security threats that are relevant to its ISMS scope and objectives1. The organization should use internal and external sources of information, such as vulnerability databases, threat feeds, industry reports, etc., to produce threat intelligence that can be used to support risk assessment and treatment, as well as other information security activities1. Therefore, when auditing the organization’s application of control 5.7, an ISMS auditor should verify that these aspects are met in accordance with the audit criteria.

Three options that represent valid audit trails for verifying control 5.7 are:

I will review the organisation’s threat intelligence process and will ensure that this is fully documented: This option is valid because it can provide evidence of how the organization has established and maintained a threat intelligence process that is consistent with its ISMS scope and objectives. It can also verify that the process is documented according to clause 7.5 of ISO/IEC 27001:20221.

I will check that threat intelligence is actively used to protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the organisation’s information assets: This option is valid because it can provide evidence of how the organization has used threat intelligence to support its risk assessment and treatment, as well as other information security activities, such as incident response, awareness, or monitoring. It can also verify that the organization has achieved its information security objectives according to clause 6.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:20221.

I will determine whether internal and external sources of information are used in the production of threat intelligence: This option is valid because it can provide evidence of how the organization has used various sources of information, such as vulnerability databases, threat feeds, industry reports, etc., to produce threat intelligence that is relevant and reliable. It can also verify that the organization has complied with the requirement of control 5.7 of ISO/IEC 27001:20221.

The other options are not valid audit trails for verifying control 5.7, as they are not related to the control or its requirements. For example:

I will speak to top management to make sure all staff are aware of the importance of reporting threats: This option is not valid because it does not provide evidence of how the organization has established and maintained a threat intelligence process or used threat intelligence to support its ISMS activities. It may be related to another control or requirement regarding information security awareness or communication, but not specifically to control 5.7.

I will ensure that the task of producing threat intelligence is assigned to the organisation s internal audit team: This option is not valid because it does not provide evidence of how the organization has established and maintained a threat intelligence process or used threat intelligence to support its ISMS activities. It may also contradict the requirement for auditor independence and objectivity, as recommended by ISO 19011:20182, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems.

I will ensure that the organisation’s risk assessment process begins with effective threat intelligence: This option is not valid because it does not provide evidence of how the organization has established and maintained a threat intelligence process or used threat intelligence to support its ISMS activities. It may also imply a prescriptive approach to risk assessment that is not consistent with ISO/IEC 27005:20183, which provides guidelines for information security risk management.

I will review how information relating to information security threats is collected and evaluated to produce threat intelligence: This option is not valid because it does not provide evidence of how the organization has established and maintained a threat intelligence process or used threat intelligence to support its ISMS activities. It may also be too vague or broad to be an effective audit trail, as it does not specify what criteria or methods are used for collecting and evaluating information.

I will ensure that appropriate measures have been introduced to inform top management as to the effectiveness of current threat intelligence arrangements: This option is not valid because it does not provide evidence of how the organization has established and maintained a threat intelligence process or used threat intelligence to support its ISMS activities. It may be related to another control or requirement regarding management review or performance evaluation, but not specifically to control 5.7.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology – Security techniques – Information security management systems – Requirements, ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems, ISO/IEC 27005:2018 - Information technology – Security techniques – Information security risk management

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

C. Correct Answer:

Technical verification involves directly testing or simulating controls.

Webvue’s personnel simulated the encryption process, confirming test data security measures.

A. Incorrect:

Document review is passive, while technical verification is active and includes real-time assessments.

B. Incorrect:

Corroboration is about cross-checking information, whereas technical verification tests controls in practice.

Relevant Standard Reference:

ISO 19011:2018 Clause 6.4.9 (Technical Verification in Audits)

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

B. Correct Answer:

A second-party audit is conducted by an organization on its suppliers or outsourced service providers to ensure compliance with contractual and regulatory requirements.

Branding audited Techvology, an outsourced IT service provider, making this a second-party audit.

A. Incorrect:

A first-party audit is an internal audit, but Techvology is not an internal entity.

C. Incorrect:

A third-party audit is performed by an independent certification body, which is not the case here.

Relevant Standard Reference:

ISO 19011:2018 Clause 3.8 (Types of Audits: First, Second, and Third-Party Audits)

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

C. Correct Answer: Changes to the audit scope must be approved by the auditee, the auditor, and the certification body. This ensures fairness and maintains compliance with ISO 19011 guidelines on audit planning.

A. Incorrect: The audit schedule cannot be changed solely at Cobt’s request—approval is required.

B. Incorrect: Audit scope is not limited to technological changes but includes organizational and procedural changes as well.

Relevant Standard Reference:

ISO 19011:2018 Clause 5.5.2 (Determining the Audit Scope and Schedule)

The following are purposes of information security, except increasing business assets. Increasing business assets is not a purpose of information security, as it is not directly related to protecting information and systems from threats and risks. Information security may contribute to increasing business assets by enhancing customer trust, reputation, compliance, and efficiency, but it is not its primary goal. Ensuring business continuity is a purpose of information security, as it aims to prevent or minimize disruptions or losses caused by incidents affecting information and systems. Minimizing business risk is a purpose of information security, as it aims to identify and reduce threats and vulnerabilities that may compromise information and systems. Maximizing return on investment is a purpose of information security, as it aims to optimize the costs and benefits of implementing and maintaining information security controls and measures. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 23. : [ISO/IEC 27001 Brochures | PECB], page 4.

Step 1 = Incident logging Step 2 = Incident categorisation Step 3 = Incident prioritisation Step 4 = Incident assignment Step 5 = Task creation and management Step 6 = SLA management and escalation Step 7 = Incident resolution Step 8 = Incident closure

The order of the stages in the information security incident management process should follow a logical sequence that ensures a quick, effective, and orderly response to the incidents, events, and weaknesses. The order should also be consistent with the best practices and guidance provided by ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and ISO/IEC 27035:2022. Therefore, the following order is suggested:

Step 1 = Incident logging: This step involves recording the details of the potential incident, event, or weakness, such as the date, time, source, description, impact, and reporter. This step is important to provide a traceable record of the incident and to facilitate the subsequent analysis and response. This step is related to control A.16.1.1 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to establish responsibilities and procedures for the management of information security incidents, events, and weaknesses. This step is also related to clause 6.2 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to log the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 2 = Incident categorisation: This step involves determining the type and nature of the incident, event, or weakness, such as whether it is a hardware issue, network issue, or software issue. This step is important to classify the incident and to assign it to the appropriate resolver or team. This step is related to control A.16.1.2 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to report information security events and weaknesses as quickly as possible through appropriate management channels. This step is also related to clause 6.3 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to categorize the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 3 = Incident prioritisation: This step involves assessing the severity and urgency of the incident, event, or weakness, and classifying it as critical, high, medium, or low. This step is important to prioritize the incident and to allocate the necessary resources and time for the response. This step is related to control A.16.1.3 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to assess and prioritize information security events and weaknesses in accordance with the defined criteria. This step is also related to clause 6.4 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to prioritize the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 4 = Incident assignment: This step involves passing the incident, event, or weakness to the individual or team who is best suited to resolve it, based on their skills, knowledge, and availability. This step is important to ensure that the incident is handled by the right person or team and to avoid delays or confusion. This step is related to control A.16.1.4 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to respond to information security events and weaknesses in a timely manner, according to the agreed procedures. This step is also related to clause 6.5 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to assign the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 5 = Task creation and management: This step involves identifying and coordinating the work needed to resolve the incident, event, or weakness, such as performing root cause analysis, testing solutions, implementing changes, and documenting actions. This step is important to ensure that the incident is resolved effectively and efficiently, and that the actions are tracked and controlled. This step is related to control A.16.1.5 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to apply lessons learned from information security events and weaknesses to take corrective and preventive actions. This step is also related to clause 6.6 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to create and manage the tasks for the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 6 = SLA management and escalation: This step involves ensuring that any service level agreements (SLAs) are adhered to while the resolution is being implemented, and that the incident is escalated to a higher level of authority or support if a breach looks likely or occurs. This step is important to ensure that the incident is resolved within the agreed time frame and quality, and that any deviations or issues are communicated and addressed. This step is related to control A.16.1.6 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to communicate information security events and weaknesses to the relevant internal and external parties, as appropriate. This step is also related to clause 6.7 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to manage the SLAs and escalations for the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 7 = Incident resolution: This step involves applying a temporary workaround or a permanent solution to resolve the incident, event, or weakness, and restoring the normal operation of the information and information processing facilities. This step is important to ensure that the incident is resolved completely and satisfactorily, and that the information security is restored to the desired level. This step is related to control A.16.1.7 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to identify the cause of information security events and weaknesses, and to take actions to prevent their recurrence or occurrence. This step is also related to clause 6.8 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to resolve the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

Step 8 = Incident closure: This step involves closing the incident, event, or weakness, after verifying that it has been resolved satisfactorily, and that all the actions have been completed and documented. This step is important to ensure that the incident is formally closed and that no further actions are required. This step is related to control A.16.1.8 of ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which requires the organization to collect evidence and document the information security events and weaknesses, and the actions taken. This step is also related to clause 6.9 of ISO/IEC 27035:2022, which provides guidance on how to close the incidents, events, and weaknesses.

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

ISO/IEC 27035:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security incident management

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

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