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

Knowledge is the understanding of facts, concepts, principles, theories and practices related to a specific subject or discipline. Skills are the ability to apply knowledge and use know-how to complete tasks and solve problems. According to ISO 19011:2018, the knowledge and skills of an auditor include the following:

• Knowledge of audit principles, procedures and methods
• Knowledge of management system standards and reference documents
• Knowledge of the organization’s context, scope, processes and objectives
• Knowledge of relevant legal, regulatory and contractual requirements
• Knowledge of applicable industry, sector or technical disciplines
• Knowledge of risk management and risk-based thinking
• Skill in collecting and verifying information
• Skill in evaluating conformity and effectiveness of management systems
• Skill in reporting and communicating audit results
• Skill in managing audit activities and teams

Based on this, the activities that are predominately related to knowledge are designing a checklist and determining what evidence to gather, as they require the auditor to understand the audit criteria, scope, objectives and methods, as well as the organization’s context, processes and risks. The other activities are more related to skills, as they involve applying knowledge and using know-how to perform tasks and solve problems during the audit.

References:

• ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, clauses 7.2.1, 7.2.2 and 7.2.3
• PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 9-10 and 16-17
• ISO 9001 Auditing Practices Group Guidance on: Auditing Competence, pages 2-3 and 8

Audit objectives are the specific purposes or goals that the customer or the certification body wants to achieve through the audit. They define what the audit intends to accomplish and provide the basis for planning and conducting the audit. Audit objectives may vary depending on the type, scope, and criteria of the audit, but they should be clear, measurable, and achievable.

Some examples of audit objectives for a third-party ISMS audit are:

• Assess conformity with ISO/IEC 27001 requirements: This objective means that the audit aims to verify that the organisation’s ISMS meets the requirements of the ISO/IEC 27001 standard, which specifies the best practices for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and improving an information security management system. The audit will evaluate the organisation’s ISMS documentation, processes, controls, and performance against the standard’s clauses and annex A controls.
• Confirm sites operating the ISMS: This objective means that the audit aims to confirm that the organisation’s ISMS covers all the relevant sites or locations where the organisation operates or provides its services. The audit will verify that the scope of the ISMS is accurate and consistent with the organisation’s context, objectives, and risks.

The other phrases are not audit objectives, but rather:

• Evaluate customer processes and functions: This is not an audit objective, but rather a possible audit criterion or a requirement that the organisation’s processes and functions should meet. The audit criterion is the reference against which the audit evidence is compared to determine conformity or nonconformity. The audit criterion may include ISO/IEC 27001 requirements, customer requirements, or other applicable standards or regulations.
• Fulfil the audit plan: This is not an audit objective, but rather a task or an activity that the auditor performs during the audit. The audit plan is a document that describes the arrangements and details of the audit, such as the objectives, scope, criteria, schedule, roles, and responsibilities. The auditor should follow and fulfil the audit plan to ensure that the audit is conducted effectively and efficiently.
• Determine the scope of the ISMS: This is not an audit objective, but rather a prerequisite or an input for conducting the audit. The scope of the ISMS is the extent and boundaries of the information security management system within the organisation. It defines what processes, activities, locations, assets, and stakeholders are included or excluded from the ISMS. The scope of the ISMS should be determined by the organisation before applying for certification or undergoing an audit.
• Review organisation efficiency: This is not an audit objective, but rather a possible outcome or a result of conducting an audit. The organisation efficiency is a measure of how well the organisation uses its resources to achieve its goals and objectives. The audit may help review and improve the organisation efficiency by identifying strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in its information security management system.

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]

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

Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is a framework that describes the key elements of an effective software process. It defines five levels of maturity for software development organizations, from initial to optimized. The CMM helps organizations to assess their current level of process capability and identify the areas for improvement1. References: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor - IECB

• 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

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

The benefits of implementing an ISMS are not limited to a reduction in information security risks, but also include improved business performance, customer satisfaction, legal compliance, and stakeholder confidence. The benefit of certifying an ISMS is not only to obtain contracts from governmental institutions, but also to demonstrate the organisation’s commitment to information security to other potential customers, partners, and regulators. The purpose of an ISMS is to apply a risk management process for preserving information security, which means identifying, analysing, evaluating, treating, monitoring, and reviewing the information security risks that the organisation faces. The purpose of an ISMS is not to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements, but rather to ensure that the organisation meets its own information security objectives and obligations.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) objectives and content from Quality.org and PECB
• ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements [Section 0.1] and [Section 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 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 three options of the corrections and corrective actions listed that you would expect ABC to make in response to the nonconformity are:

• B. ABC cancels the service agreement with WeCare.
• E. ABC introduces background checks on information security performance for all suppliers.
• F. ABC periodically monitors compliance with all applicable legislation and contractual requirements involving third parties.

• B. This option is a possible correction and corrective action that ABC could take to address the nonconformity. A correction is the action taken to eliminate a detected nonconformity, while a corrective action is the action taken to eliminate the cause of a nonconformity and to prevent its recurrence1. By cancelling the service agreement with WeCare, ABC could stop the unauthorized use of residents’ personal data and protect their privacy and rights. This could also prevent further complaints and legal issues from the residents and their family members. However, this option may also have some drawbacks, such as the loss of a service provider, the need to find an alternative solution, and the potential impact on the residents’ well-being.
• E. This option is a possible corrective action that ABC could take to address the nonconformity. By introducing background checks on information security performance for all suppliers, ABC could ensure that they select and work with reliable and trustworthy partners who respect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the information they handle. This could also help ABC to comply with information security control A.15.1.1 (Information security policy for supplier relationships), which requires the organisation to agree and document information security requirements for mitigating the risks associated with supplier access to the organisation’s assets2.
• F. This option is a possible corrective action that ABC could take to address the nonconformity. By periodically monitoring compliance with all applicable legislation and contractual requirements involving third parties, ABC could verify that the suppliers are fulfilling their obligations and responsibilities regarding information security. This could also help ABC to comply with information security control A.18.1.1 (Identification of applicable legislation and contractual requirements), which requires the organisation to identify, document, and keep up to date the relevant legislative, regulatory, contractual, and other requirements to which the organisation is subject3.

References:

1: ISO 27000:2018 - Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Overview and vocabulary, clause 3.9 and 3.10 2: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Annex A, control A.15.1.1 3: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 - Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Annex A, control A.18.1.1

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

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 mail sent by the CEO giving his views on the status of the company and the company’s future strategy and the CEO’s vision and the employee’s part in it should be classified as internal mail. Internal mail is a type of classification that indicates that the information is intended for internal use only, and should not be disclosed to external parties without authorization. The mail sent by the CEO contains information that is relevant and important for the employees of the company, but may not be suitable for public disclosure, as it may contain sensitive or confidential information about the company’s performance, goals, or plans. References: : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 34. : CQI & IRCA ISO 27001:2022 Lead Auditor Course Handbook, page 37. : [ISO/IEC 27001 LEAD AUDITOR - PECB], page 14.

The main purpose of a Stage 1 audit is to evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the organisation’s ISMS documentation, and to assess whether the organisation is prepared for the Stage 2 audit, where the implementation and operation of the ISMS will be verified. The Stage 1 audit also involves verifying the scope, objectives, and context of the ISMS, as well as identifying any areas of concern or nonconformities that need to be addressed before the Stage 2 audit.

References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) objectives and content from Quality.org and PECB
• ISO/IEC 27006:2015 Information technology — Security techniques — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems Section 7.3.1

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

The four controls from the list that are related to PHYSICAL aspects of the ISMS are:

•Access to and from the loading bay

•How power and data cables enter the building

•The operation of the site CCTV and door control systems

•The organisation’s arrangements for maintaining equipment

These controls are derived from the ISO 27001 Annex A, which provides a comprehensive list of information security controls that can be applied to an ISMS1. The other controls in the list are more related to ORGANIZATIONAL, LEGAL, or HUMAN aspects of the ISMS, which are also important, but not the focus of this question.

According to the ISMS Auditing Guideline2, the auditor in training should review the PHYSICAL controls by:

•Checking the SoA to identify the applicable controls and their implementation status

•Interviewing the relevant staff and management to verify their understanding and involvement in the controls

•Observing the physical and environmental conditions to confirm the existence and effectiveness of the controls

•Examining the relevant documents and records to validate the compliance and performance of the controls

I hope this helps you prepare for the exam. ????

References: 1: What Are ISO 27001 Controls? A Guide to Annex A | Secureframe; 2: ISMS Auditing Guideline - ISO27000

A checklist is a tool that helps auditors to collect and verify information relevant to the audit objectives and scope. It can provide the following advantages:

• Ensuring relevant audit trails are followed: A checklist can help auditors to identify and trace the sources of evidence that support the conformity or nonconformity of the audited criteria. It can also help auditors to avoid missing or overlooking any important aspects of the audit.
• Ensuring the audit plan is implemented: A checklist can help auditors to follow and fulfil the audit plan, which describes the arrangements and details of the audit, such as the objectives, scope, criteria, schedule, roles, and responsibilities. It can also help auditors to manage their time and resources effectively and efficiently.

The other options are not advantages of using a checklist, but rather:

• Using the same checklist for every audit without review: This is a disadvantage of using a checklist, as it can lead to a rigid and ineffective audit approach. A checklist should be tailored and adapted to each specific audit, taking into account the context, risks, and changes of the auditee and the audit criteria. A checklist should also be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure its validity and relevance.
• Restricting interviews to nominated parties: This is a disadvantage of using a checklist, as it can limit the scope and depth of the audit. A checklist should not prevent auditors from interviewing other relevant parties or sources of information that may provide valuable evidence or insights for the audit. A checklist should be used as a guide, not as a constraint.
• Reducing audit duration: This is not necessarily an advantage of using a checklist, as it depends on various factors, such as the complexity, size, and maturity of the auditee’s ISMS, the availability and quality of evidence, the competence and experience of the auditors, and the level of cooperation and communication between the auditors and the auditee. A checklist may help reduce audit duration by improving efficiency and organization, but it may also increase audit duration by requiring more evidence or verification.
• Not varying from the checklist when necessary: This is a disadvantage of using a checklist, as it can result in a superficial or incomplete audit. A checklist should not prevent auditors from exploring or investigating any issues or concerns that arise during the audit, even if they are not included in the checklist. A checklist should be used as a support, not as a substitute.

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 6.2.2]

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

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

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

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

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

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

References:

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

According to ISO 27001:2013, clause 5.2, the top management of an organization must establish, implement and maintain an information security policy that is appropriate to the purpose of the organization and provides a framework for setting information security objectives. The information security policy must also include a commitment to comply with the applicable legal, regulatory and contractual requirements, as well as any other requirements that the organization subscribes to. Therefore, maintaining regulatory compliance is part of fulfilling the management system policy and ensuring its effectiveness and suitability. References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, clause 5.2
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 10
• ISO 27001 Policy: How to write it according to ISO 27001

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

These three options represent valid audit trails for control 5.7, as they are aligned with the control’s requirements and objectives. According to the web search results from my predefined tool, control 5.7 requires organisations to collect and analyse information relating to information security threats and use that information to take mitigation actions12. The control also specifies that threat intelligence should be relevant, perceptive, contextual, and actionable, and that it should be used to prevent, detect, or respond to threats34. Therefore, the auditor should verify how the organisation collects, analyses, and produces threat intelligence, how it uses threat intelligence to protect its information assets, and how it monitors and evaluates the effectiveness of its threat intelligence arrangements. The other options are not valid audit trails, as they are either irrelevant, incorrect, or incomplete. For example:

•The task of producing threat intelligence is not assigned to the organisation’s internal audit team, but to the person or team responsible for the ISMS, such as the information security manager or the information security committee5 .

•The organisation’s risk assessment process does not begin with effective threat intelligence, but with the identification of the context, scope, and objectives of the ISMS . Threat intelligence is an input for the risk identification and analysis, but not the starting point of the risk assessment process.

•Speaking to top management to make sure all staff are aware of the importance of reporting threats is not sufficient to audit the control, as it does not address how the organisation collects, analyses, and produces threat intelligence, nor how it uses it to take mitigation actions. The auditor should also speak to the staff involved in the threat intelligence process, and review the relevant documents and records.

•Checking that the organisation has a fully documented threat intelligence process is not enough to audit the control, as it does not verify the implementation and effectiveness of the process. The auditor should also observe the process in action, and examine the outputs and outcomes of the process.

•Determining whether internal and external sources of information are used in the production of threat intelligence is a partial audit trail, as it only covers one aspect of the control. The auditor should also assess the quality, reliability, and relevance of the sources, and how the information is analysed and used.

References: = 1: ISO 27001:2022 Annex A 5.7 – Threat Intelligence - ISMS.online12: ISO 27001 Annex A 5.7 Threat Intelligence - High Table23: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, clause A.5.74: ISO 27002 Emphasizes Need For Threat Intelligence - Rapid745: ISO/IEC 27007:2011 Information technology — Security techniques — Guidelines for information security management systems auditing, clause 6.3.2. : ISO 27001 Statement of Applicability [Updated 2024] - Sprinto3 : ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, clause 6.1.1. : ISO 27001 Requirement 6.1.1 – Actions to address risks and opportunities | ISMS.online1

• A follow-up audit may be carried out where nonconformities are major. This is true because a major nonconformity is a situation that raises significant doubt about the ability of the organization’s management system to achieve its intended results, and therefore requires immediate corrective action. A follow-up audit is necessary to verify the effectiveness of the corrective action and the conformity of the management system12.
• A follow-up audit may be carried out where nonconformities are minor. This is true because a minor nonconformity is a situation that does not affect the capability of the management system to achieve its intended results, but represents a deviation from the specified requirements. A follow-up audit may be conducted to check the implementation of the corrective action and the improvement of the management system12.
• The outcomes of a follow-up audit should be reported to top management and the audit team leader who carried out the audit where the nonconformities were initially identified. This is true because the top management is responsible for ensuring the effectiveness and continual improvement of the management system, and the audit team leader is accountable for the audit process and the audit conclusions. The follow-up audit report should provide them with objective evidence of the status of the nonconformities and the corrective actions taken by the auditee13.
• The outcomes of a follow-up audit should be reported to the individual managing the audit programme and the audit client. This is true because the individual managing the audit programme is responsible for planning, implementing, monitoring and reviewing the audit activities, and the audit client is the organization or person requesting an audit. The follow-up audit report should inform them of the results of the follow-up audit and any changes in the certification status of the auditee13.

References :=

• ISO 19011:2022 Guidelines for auditing management systems
• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements
• ISO/IEC 17021-1:2022 Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems — Part 1: Requirements

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, the audit reports should be produced by the audit team leader with input from the audit team, as they are responsible for collecting and analysing the audit evidence1. The audit reports should also include or refer to the audit plan, as it provides the basis for the audit objectives, scope, criteria, and methodology2. Furthermore, the audit reports should be produced within an agreed timescale, as it is part of the audit programme management and ensures timely communication of the audit results3. Additionally, the audit reports should always be reviewed by the client, dated, and signed as ‘accepted’, as it confirms the audit completion and the formal agreement on the audit findings and conclusions4.

The other statements are false because:

• Audit reports should not be sent to the organisation’s top management first because their contents could be embarrassing, as this would compromise the audit impartiality and confidentiality5. Audit reports should be distributed according to the audit programme procedures and the audit plan.
• Audit reports should not be assumed suitable for general circulation unless they are specifically marked confidential, as this would violate the audit confidentiality and the protection of personal information. Audit reports should be treated as confidential documents and only shared with the authorised parties.
• Audit reports should not only evidence nonconformity, as this would limit the audit scope and value. Audit reports should also evidence conformity, improvement opportunities, good practices, and audit observations.
• Audit reports that are no longer required should not be destroyed as part of the organisation’s general waste, as this would pose a risk to the audit confidentiality and the information security. Audit reports should be retained, disposed, or destroyed according to the audit programme procedures and the applicable legal requirements.

References: 1: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 32, section 4.4.32: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 33, section 4.4.43: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 31, section 4.4.14: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 34, section 4.4.55: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 24, section 4.3.1. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 33, section 4.4.4. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 24, section 4.3.1. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 33, section 4.4.4. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 32, section 4.4.3. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 33, section 4.4.4. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 24, section 4.3.1. : PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 34, section 4.4.5.

Audit methods are the techniques and procedures that auditors use to collect and evaluate audit evidence. Audit methods can be classified into two categories: those that involve human interaction and those that do not. Human interaction methods are those that require direct or indirect communication with the auditee or other relevant parties, such as interviews, questionnaires, surveys, observations, or walkthroughs. Non-human interaction methods are those that do not require any communication with the auditee or other parties, such as document reviews, data analysis, or remote surveillance.

Some examples of audit methods that do not involve human interaction are:

• Performing a review of auditee’s procedures in preparation for an audit: This method involves examining the auditee’s documented information, such as policies, processes, records, or reports, to verify their adequacy and effectiveness in meeting the audit criteria. The auditor does not need to interact with the auditee or anyone else to perform this method.
• Analysing data by remotely accessing the auditee’s server: This method involves accessing and processing the auditee’s data, such as performance indicators, logs, metrics, or statistics, to verify their accuracy and reliability in meeting the audit criteria. The auditor does not need to interact with the auditee or anyone else to perform this method.

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 6.2.2]

The main purpose of a Stage 2 third-party audit is to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the organisation’s management system and to identify any nonconformances against the requirements of the standard12. The other options are either the objectives of a Stage 1 audit (A, D) or a specific aspect of the audit scope (B). References: 1: ISO/IEC 27006:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems, Clause 9.2 \n2: PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Exam Preparation Guide, Domain 4: Preparing an ISO/IEC 27001 audit

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

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

According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.7 requires the audit team leader to conduct a follow-up audit to verify the implementation and effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee in response to the nonconformities identified during a previous audit1. The follow-up audit should be conducted in accordance with the same principles and processes as the initial audit, and should result in a conclusion on the status of the nonconformities and any remaining issues1. Therefore, when conducting a follow-up audit, an ISMS auditor should consider the following actions:

• Recommend that the outstanding minor nonconformity is dealt with at the next surveillance audit: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has cleared most of the nonconformities, including the major one, and only one minor nonconformity remains outstanding. A minor nonconformity is defined as a failure to achieve one or more requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or a situation which raises significant doubt about the ability of an ISMS process to achieve its intended output, but does not affect its overall effectiveness or conformity2. Therefore, this finding does not prevent or preclude the continuation of certification, as long as it is addressed by appropriate corrective actions within a reasonable time frame. The auditor should recommend that the outstanding minor nonconformity is dealt with at the next surveillance audit, which is a regular audit conducted by the certification body to confirm the ongoing conformity and effectiveness of an ISMS3.
• Agree with the auditee/audit client how the remaining nonconformity will be cleared, by when, and how its clearance will be verified: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has demonstrated commitment and capability to implement corrective actions for the nonconformities identified during the previous audit. The auditor should agree with the auditee/audit client on a realistic, achievable, and effective corrective action plan for the remaining nonconformity, including a clear deadline and verification method. The auditor should also document this agreement in the follow-up audit report1.
• Advise the individual managing the audit programme of any decision taken regarding the outstanding nonconformity: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditor has followed a systematic and consistent approach to conducting and reporting the follow-up audit. The auditor should advise the individual managing the audit programme of any decision taken regarding the outstanding nonconformity, such as recommending its closure at the next surveillance audit or agreeing on a corrective action plan with the auditee/audit client. The auditor should also provide sufficient information and evidence to support their decision1.
• Close the follow-up audit as the organisation has demonstrated it is committed to clearing the nonconformities raised: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the organisation has achieved satisfactory results in the follow-up audit. The auditor should close the follow-up audit as the organisation has demonstrated it is committed to clearing the nonconformities raised by implementing effective corrective actions for most of them and agreeing on a plan for the remaining one. The auditor should also communicate the follow-up audit conclusion to the auditee/audit client and other relevant parties1.

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

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.

According to ISO/IEC 27001 standards, if the auditee decides to accept the risk instead of implementing corrective actions for a nonconformity, this decision should be justified and documented. Documenting such decisions is essential for maintaining the integrity of the ISMS and for demonstrating that the decision was made based on informed judgment.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause 6.1 (Actions to address risks and opportunities)

You are an experienced ISMS auditor conducting a third-party surveillance audit at an organisation which offers ICT reclamation services. ICT equipment which companies no longer require is processed by the organisation. It is either recommissioned and reused or is securely destroyed.

You notice two servers on a bench in the corner of the room. Both have stickers on them with the server's name, IP address and admin password. You ask the ICT Manager about them, and he tells you they were part of a shipment received yesterday from a regular customer.

Which one action should you take?

A.Ask the auditee to remove the labels, then carry on with the audit

B.Ask the ICT Manager to record an information security incident and initiate the information security incident management process

C.Note the audit finding and check the process for dealing with incoming shipments relating to customer IT security

D.Raise a nonconformity against control 5.31 'Legal, staturary, regulatory and contractual requirements'

E.Raise 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)

F.Record what you have seen in your audit findings, but take no further action

Answer: C

You are an experienced ISMS audit team leader. You are currently conducting a third-party surveillance audit of an

international haulage organisation. You have sampled four internal audit reports which state:

Report 1 - Auditor: Mr James.

Over the year the organisation has failed to meet its promised delivery dates on 23 occasions out of 100. This is against a target of '95% of deliveries on time'.

Grading - Minor

Corrective Action due: Within 9 months.

Report 2 - Auditor: Mr James.

Between January and March, it was noted 125 complaints were received about the Service Desk Team. Clients

accused them of being rude and unresponsive.

Grading - Minor

Corrective Action due: Within 12 months.

Report 3 - Auditor: Mr James.

Of the 40 customer orders received last month, 38 were correctly processed. Of the remaining 2, one was missing a

signature and one was missing a date.

Grading -

Corrections due: Within 3 weeks

Report 4 - Auditor: Mr Rogers.

Of the 30 personnel records examined, 26 were found to be fully completed whilst the remaining 4 were all missing

the individual's start date.

Grading – Major

Corrections due: Within 1 week

Which four of the options demonstrate the concerns you would have about these reports?

A.I would be concerned as to whether criteria for grading nonconformities are in existence in this organisation

B.I would be concerned as to whether the auditors understand the difference between corrections and corrective actions

C.I would be concerned because action taken to address a major nonconformity should always be completed sooner than action taken to address minor nonconformities

D.I would be concerned that no grading is recorded for Report 3. This could indicate that the auditor did not complete the report correctly or that they failed to make a determination as to severity

E.I would be concerned that the auditors focussed only on information security processes

F.I would be concerned that timing for addressing the nonconformities is significantly different in the four reports

G.I would have a concern that no nonconformity review was conducted

H.I would have a concern that one auditor appeared to be conducting most of the internal audits

Answer: ABDF

As the Information Security Management System audit team leader, you are conducting a second-party audit of an international logistics company on behalf of an online retailer. During the audit, one of your team members reports a nonconformity relating to control 5.18 (Access rights) of Appendix A of ISO/IEC 27001:2022. She found evidence that removing the server access protocols of 20 people who left in the last 3 months took up to 1 week whereas the policy required removing access within 24 hours of their departure.

When the auditee was asked why there was a delay in removing access they replied, 'no one was available in the IT department during that period as a result of COVID-19. As soon as an IT officer became available the rights were removed.

You note that she intends to raise a minor non-conformity against Access rights control (5.18). How should you respond to this?

A.Agree with the raising of a minor non-conformity but against control 5.15, not 5.18.

B.Agree with the raising of the minor non-conformity against 5.18.

C.Disagree with the raising of a minor conformity as appropriate action was taken at the earliest opportunity Take no further action.

D.Disagree with the raising of the minor nonconformity as appropriate action was taken at the earliest opportunity. Instead raise an opportunity for improvement.

E.Disagree with the raising of the minor nonconformity, there is sufficient evidence to justify an escalation to a major non-conformity.

F.Require additional audit evidence to be obtained before determining whether a non-conformity is appropriate.

Answer: A

The purpose of including access rights in an information management system to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 is to provide, review, modify and remove these permissions in accordance with the organisation’s policy and rules for access control. 

Access rights are the permissions granted to users or groups of users to access, use, modify, or delete information assets. Access rights should be aligned with the organisation’s access control policy, which defines the objectives, principles, roles, and responsibilities for managing access to information systems. Access rights should also follow the organisation’s rules for access control, which specify the criteria, procedures, and controls for granting, reviewing, modifying, and revoking access rights. The purpose of including access rights in an information management system is to ensure that only authorised users can access information assets according to their business needs and roles, and to prevent unauthorised or inappropriate access that could compromise the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of information assets. References:

• ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A Control 5.181
• ISO/IEC 27002:2022 Control 5.182
• CQI & IRCA Certified ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Lead Auditor (Information Security Management Systems) Training Course3

A document review is a process of examining the documented information related to the management system before the on-site audit activities. The purpose of a document review is to: 12

• Determine the conformity of the management system, as far as documented, with audit criteria, i.e., to check whether the documents are consistent, complete, and compliant with the requirements of ISO/IEC 27001 and any other applicable standards or regulations.
• Gather information to support the on-site audit activities, i.e., to identify the scope, objectives, processes, controls, risks, and opportunities of the management system, and to plan the audit methods, techniques, and resources accordingly.

The other statements are not accurate, because:

• A document review does not reveal or decide about the conformity or nonconformity of the management system as a whole, but only of the documented information. The conformity or nonconformity of the management system is determined by the on-site audit activities, which include interviews, observations, and tests12
• A document review does not gather evidence or findings to support the audit report or process, but information to support the on-site audit activities. The evidence or findings are collected during the on-site audit activities, which are then documented and reported12
• A document review does not detect any nonconformity of the management system, if documented, but determines the conformity of the documented information. The nonconformity of the management system is detected by the on-site audit activities, which evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the management system12
• A document review does not identify information to support the audit plan, but gathers information to support the on-site audit activities. The audit plan is prepared before the document review, based on the audit scope, objectives, criteria, and program. The document review is part of the audit plan implementation12

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

Materiality in the context of an audit involves assessing what level of nonconformities or failures, including those related to legal and contractual compliance, would be significant enough to affect the audit conclusions. Costs related to these issues are considered when determining materiality.

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

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

The correct options are:

• There is a nonconformity (NC). The organisation’s access control arrangements are not operating effectively as an individual who is no longer employed by the organisation is being permitted to access the nursing home’s ICT systems. This does not conform with control A.5.15. (B): This option is correct because control A.5.15 requires the organization to implement secure log-on procedures and manage user access rights. The organization should ensure that only authorized users can access the ICT systems and that the access rights are revoked or modified when the user status changes. The fact that Scott, who resigned 9 months ago, still has an active account on the SCM and can check out the source code, indicates a failure of the access control arrangements and a nonconformity with the control A.5.15.
• There is a nonconformity (NC). The IT Security manager did not make sure the user account for Scott was removed from the SCM and did not complete the user deregistration process after the resignation. This does not conform with clause 9.1 and control A.5.15. ©: This option is correct because clause 9.1 requires the organization to monitor, measure, analyze, and evaluate the performance and effectiveness of the ISMS. The organization should have processes and indicators to verify that the ISMS requirements and objectives are met and that the ISMS is continually improved. The organization should also ensure that the results of the monitoring and measurement are documented and communicated. The fact that the IT Security manager did not follow the user de-registration procedure and did not document or communicate the exception for Scott, indicates a failure of the monitoring and measurement processes and a nonconformity with clause 9.1 and control A.5.15.
• There is a nonconformity (NC). The organisation has failed to identify the security risks associated with leaving Scott’s account open when he was only re-engaged for a short period monthly. This does not conform with clause 8.2. (F): This option is correct because clause 8.2 requires the organization to establish and maintain an information security risk management process. The organization should identify the information security risks, analyze and evaluate the risks, and treat the risks according to the risk criteria and the risk treatment options. The organization should also monitor and review the risks and the risk treatment plan periodically and document the results. The fact that the organization did not identify the security risks associated with Scott’s access to the SCM and the source code, such as unauthorized disclosure, modification, or deletion of the information, indicates a failure of the risk management process and a nonconformity with clause 8.2.

The auditor should verify if the information required by the standard is documented, without necessarily focusing on the format, as long as the content meets the requirements of the standard. ISO/IEC 27001 does not mandate a specific format for documentation, only that necessary information is appropriately documented, maintained, and controlled.

References: ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Clause 7.5 (Documented information)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References: =

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

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

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?

UpNet's certification was suspended because the certification body was not informed about the significant changes caused by the new department, impacting the governance of the management system. ISO/IEC 27001 requires organizations to inform the certification body of any changes that significantly impact the ISMS.

The Act phase of the PDCA cycle is where the organisation takes actions to improve its processes and performance based on the results of the Check phase. This may involve resetting objectives to make them more realistic, achievable or challenging, or implementing changes to address the root causes of problems and achieve the desired outcomes. The Act phase is also where the organisation monitors the effects of the actions taken and evaluates their effectiveness and efficiency. The Act phase is important because it enables the organisation to learn from its experience and continually improve its ISMS. References: What is ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’? A framework for continuous improvement, PDCA in ISO27001 - Free guide to learn | Dr. Erdal Ozkaya, PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor (page 12)

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.

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, audit methods can be classified into two categories: with or without interaction with individuals representing the auditee (page 12). Audit methods with interaction include reviewing checklists with auditee and conducting interviews, as they involve direct communication and feedback from the auditee. Audit methods without interaction include sampling (e.g. products), observing work performed via live video streaming, checking legal compliance with local authorities, and analysing documents provided in advance of the audit, as they do not require any dialogue or exchange with the auditee. References: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 12.

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.

According to ISO 27001:2022 clause 9.1.2, the organisation shall conduct internal audits at planned intervals to provide information on whether the information security management system conforms to the organisation’s own requirements, the requirements of ISO 27001:2022, and is effectively implemented and maintained12

According to ISO 27001:2022 clause 10.1, the organisation shall react to the nonconformities and take action, as applicable, to control and correct them and deal with the consequences. The organisation shall also evaluate the need for action to eliminate the causes of nonconformities, in order to prevent recurrence or occurrence. The organisation shall implement any action needed, review the effectiveness of any corrective action taken, and make changes to the information security management system, if necessary12

A follow-up audit is a type of internal audit that is conducted after a previous audit to verify whether the nonconformities and corrective actions have been addressed and resolved, and whether the information security management system has been improved12

Therefore, the following statements are true for preparing a follow-up audit plan:

• Verification should focus on whether any action undertaken is complete. This means that the auditor should check whether the organisation has implemented all the planned actions to correct and prevent the nonconformities, and whether the actions have been documented and communicated as required12
• Verification should focus on whether any action undertaken has been undertaken effectively. This means that the auditor should check whether the organisation has achieved the intended results and objectives of the actions, and whether the actions have eliminated or reduced the nonconformities and their causes and consequences12

The following statements are false for preparing a follow-up audit plan:

• Verification should focus on whether any action undertaken has been undertaken efficiently. This is false because efficiency is not a criterion for verifying the actions taken to address the nonconformities and corrective actions. Efficiency refers to the optimal use of resources to achieve the desired outcomes, but it is not a requirement of ISO 27001:2022. The auditor should focus on the effectiveness and completeness of the actions, not on the efficiency12
• Corrections should be verified first, followed by corrective actions and finally opportunities for improvement. This is false because there is no prescribed order for verifying the corrections, corrective actions, and opportunities for improvement. The auditor should verify all the actions taken by the organisation, regardless of their sequence or priority. The auditor may choose to verify the actions based on their relevance, significance, or impact, but this is not a mandatory requirement12
• Opportunities for improvement should be verified first, followed by corrections and finally corrective actions. This is false because there is no prescribed order for verifying the opportunities for improvement, corrections, and corrective actions. The auditor should verify all the actions taken by the organisation, regardless of their sequence or priority. The auditor may choose to verify the actions based on their relevance, significance, or impact, but this is not a mandatory requirement12
• Corrective actions should be reviewed first, followed by corrections and finally opportunities for improvement. This is false because there is no prescribed order for reviewing the corrective actions, corrections, and opportunities for improvement. The auditor should review all the actions taken by the organisation, regardless of their sequence or priority. The auditor may choose to review the actions based on their relevance, significance, or impact, but this is not a mandatory requirement12

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

According to ISO 19011:2018, clause 5.3, the person responsible for managing the audit programme should determine the resources necessary for the audit programme, such as the audit team members, the budget, the time, the tools, etc. The audit resources should be sufficient and appropriate to ensure the quality and effectiveness of the audit programme and the audit results. The audit resources include the following elements12:

• Essential resources: These are the resources that are required to conduct the audit programme and the individual audits, such as the audit documents, the audit methods, the audit tools, the audit schedule, the audit budget, etc. The essential resources should be identified and allocated based on the audit objectives, scope, and criteria, and the availability and cooperation of the auditee. The essential resources should also be reviewed and updated as necessary to reflect any changes or deviations in the audit programme or the individual audits.
• Competent personnel: These are the audit team members who have the appropriate knowledge, skills, and experience to conduct the audit effectively and efficiently, and to provide credible and reliable audit results and recommendations. The competent personnel should include the audit team leader, the auditors, and any technical experts or observers who support the audit team. The competent personnel should be selected and appointed based on the audit objectives, scope, and criteria, and the specific competence requirements for the audit programme and the individual audits. The competent personnel should also be independent and impartial, and avoid any conflicts of interest or self-interest that may affect the audit results or the audit decisions.

References:

• ISO 19011:2018 - Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 5.3
• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 19

According to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, which specifies the requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), clause 4.2 requires an organization to determine the needs and expectations of interested parties that are relevant to its ISMS1. This includes identifying the legal, regulatory, contractual and other requirements that apply to its information security activities1. Therefore, collecting more evidence on what the service requirements of healthcare monitoring are may not be relevant to verifying the information security incident management process, as it is not directly related to the audit objective or criteria. This option will not be in the audit trail.

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.

The correct responsibility with each participant of a second-party audit is:

• Prepares the audit report: Audit Team Leader. The audit team leader is responsible for coordinating the audit activities, communicating with the auditee and the customer, and preparing and delivering the audit report that summarizes the audit findings and conclusions1.
• Prepares audit checklists for use during the audit: Auditor. The auditor is responsible for collecting and verifying objective evidence during the audit, using audit checklists as a tool to guide the audit process and ensure that all relevant aspects of the audit criteria are covered1.
• Supports an auditor and provides feedback on their experience: Auditor in training. The auditor in training is a person who is learning how to perform audits under the supervision of an experienced auditor. The auditor in training supports the auditor by observing and participating in the audit activities, and provides feedback on their experience to improve their skills and competence1.
• Follows-up on audit findings within an agreed timeframe: Auditee. The auditee is the organisation that is being audited by the customer or a third party on behalf of the customer. The auditee is responsible for providing access and cooperation to the auditors, and for following up on the audit findings within an agreed timeframe, by implementing corrective actions or improvement measures as needed1.
• Provides an independent account of the audit but does not participate in the audit: Observer. The observer is a person who accompanies the audit team but does not participate in the audit activities. The observer may be a representative of the customer, a regulatory body, or another interested party. The observer provides an independent account of the audit but does not interfere with or influence the audit process or outcome1.
• Escorts the auditors but does not participate in the audit: Guide. The guide is a person who is appointed by the auditee to assist the audit team during the audit. The guide may escort the auditors to different locations, facilitate access to information and personnel, or provide clarification or explanation as requested by the auditors. The guide does not participate in the audit or influence its results1.

“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.

The option that best describes how Information Security Management System (ISMS) audits should be conducted, aligning with best practices and standards like ISO/IEC 27001:2022, is:

D. Audit methods should be used to assess objective evidence in order to generate audit findings. Then, the audit conclusion should be created and presented to the auditee at the closing meeting.

This option accurately reflects the audit process, emphasizing the use of systematic audit methods to assess objective evidence, which is crucial for impartiality and accuracy in auditing. Audit findings are the results derived from evaluating the objective evidence against the audit criteria. The conclusion, based on the audit findings, provides a comprehensive summary of the audit's outcomes, indicating whether the audited ISMS meets the established criteria. Presenting these conclusions to the auditee during the closing meeting ensures transparency and provides an opportunity for immediate clarification and discussion of the results and potential next steps.

The purpose of a management system audit is to? Select 1

A.Evaluate the performance of an organisation's management system

B.Improve the performance of an organisation's management system

C.Manage the performance of an organisation's management system

D.Research the performance of an organisation's management system

Answer: A

A management system audit is a systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining objective evidence and evaluating it objectively to determine the extent to which the audit criteria are fulfilled. The audit criteria are a set of requirements that may include policies, procedures, standards, regulations, etc. The purpose of a management system audit is to evaluate the performance of an organisation’s management system in terms of its effectiveness, efficiency, compliance, and improvement. A management system audit can also identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and risks of the management system and provide recommendations for improvement.

When preparing for an audit, which of the following statements is false?

A.Each auditor creates their own audit checklist for use during the audit

B.The audit checklists are shared and agreed with the auditee in advance of the audit

C.The audit plan is shared with the auditee in advance of the audit

D.The audit plan may be changed during the audit

Answer: B

The purpose of a follow-up audit is to verify the completion and effectiveness of corrective actions taken by the auditee in response to the nonconformities identified in a previous audit1. A follow-up audit is a type of audit that is conducted after an initial audit, and it focuses on the specific areas where nonconformities were found and corrective actions were agreed upon2. A follow-up audit can be conducted as a separate audit or as part of a scheduled audit, depending on the nature and severity of the nonconformities and the audit programme objectives3.

The other options are not the purpose of a follow-up audit, but rather the purpose of other types of audits. For example:

•Option A is the purpose of a performance audit, which is a type of audit that evaluates the effectiveness of the management system in achieving its intended results4.

•Option B is the purpose of a compliance audit, which is a type of audit that verifies the conformity of the management system with the specified requirements, such as the ISMS objectives5.

•Option C is the purpose of a process audit, which is a type of audit that examines the inputs, activities, outputs, and interactions of a specific process within the management system, such as the risk treatment process.

References: 1: ISO 19011:2018, 6.7; 2: ISO 19011:2018, 3.7; 3: ISO 19011:2018, 5.5.2; 4: ISO 19011:2018, 3.6; 5: ISO 19011:2018, 3.5; : ISO 19011:2018, 3.4; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018; : ISO 19011:2018; : [ISO 19011:2018]

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

One of the advantages of having accredited certification of ISMS to ISO/IEC 27001:2022 is that it demonstrates the recognition of the credibility of the certification process. Accredited certification means that the certification body has been assessed and approved by an accreditation body, which ensures that the certification body operates according to international standards and follows impartiality, competence and consistency principles. Accredited certification also enhances the confidence of the organisation’s customers, partners, regulators and other interested parties in the organisation’s information security performance and compliance. References: = ISO/IEC 27001:2022, clause 0.2; [PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor], page 6; Key Benefits of ISO 27001 Certification - IT Governance.

The correct action to take in this situation is to raise it as an opportunity for improvement. This is because the auditee is not violating any requirement of the standard, but rather using outdated terminology that does not reflect the current version of the standard. An opportunity for improvement is a suggestion for enhancing the performance or effectiveness of the ISMS1. It is not a nonconformity, which is a failure to fulfil a requirement2. Therefore, option B is incorrect. Option A is also incorrect, because noting the issue in the audit report without raising it as an opportunity for improvement would not provide any value or feedback to the auditee. Option D is also incorrect, because bringing the matter up at the closing meeting without documenting it as an opportunity for improvement would not ensure that the auditee takes any action to address it. References: 1: ISMS Auditing Guideline - ISO27000, page 11; 2: ISO/IEC 27000:2022, 3.28; : ISMS Auditing Guideline - ISO27000; : ISO/IEC 27000:2022

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.

The use of clear text passwords for authentication in FTP is a vulnerability because it is a weakness that can be exploited by threat actors. Clear text passwords can be intercepted easily by network sniffers or through man-in-the-middle attacks, making them a significant security risk1. References: = This explanation is consistent with the understanding of vulnerabilities within the field of information security, particularly as it relates to network protocols like FTP and their associated risks

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

This option is appropriate for inclusion in the closing meeting agenda, as it is a requirement of the ISO 19011 standard, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, including ISMS12. The standard states that the audit team leader should advise the auditee of any situations encountered during the audit that may decrease the confidence that can be placed in the audit conclusions, such as limitations in the audit scope, access, or sampling3. The standard also states that the audit report should include a statement that the audit is based on a sample of the information available at the time of the audit, and that the audit does not provide absolute assurance of the conformity or effectiveness of the audited management system4. Therefore, the audit team leader should include a disclaimer in the closing meeting agenda to inform the auditee of the nature and limitations of the audit, and to avoid any misunderstandings or false expectations. The other options are not appropriate for inclusion in the closing meeting agenda, as they are either irrelevant, incorrect, or incomplete. For example:

•A detailed explanation of the certification body’s complaints process is not relevant for the closing meeting agenda, as it is not related to the audit findings or conclusions. The certification body’s complaints process should be communicated to the auditee before the audit, as part of the audit agreement or contract5.

•An explanation of the audit plan and its purpose is not correct for the closing meeting agenda, as it should have been done at the opening meeting or before the audit. The audit plan is a document that describes the scope, objectives, criteria, and methodology of the audit, as well as the audit schedule, the audit team, the audit locations, and the audit deliverables . The audit plan should be communicated and agreed with the auditee in advance, and any changes or deviations should be notified during the audit.

•Names of auditees associated with nonconformities are not complete for the closing meeting agenda, as they do not provide the details or the evidence of the nonconformities. The audit team leader should present the audit findings, which include the description, the audit criteria, and the audit evidence of each nonconformity, as well as the audit conclusions and the audit recommendation . The audit team leader should also avoid naming or blaming individuals, and focus on the processes and the system.

References: = 1: PECB Candidate Handbook - ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 222: ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 13: ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.4.94: ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 7.5.25: ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 Conformity assessment — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems — Part 1: Requirements, clause 9.8. : ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.4.1. : ISO/IEC 27007:2011 Information technology — Security techniques — Guidelines for information security management systems auditing, clause 6.2.1. : ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.4.2. : ISO 19011:2018 Guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.4.10. : ISO/IEC 27007:2011 Information technology — Security techniques — Guidelines for information security management systems auditing, clause 6.3.3.

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)

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

The 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.

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

In the context of a third-party certification audit, it is very important to have effective communication between the audit team and the auditee. The formal communication channels, such as the names and contact details of the audit team members, the auditee representatives, the audit client and any other relevant parties, can be established during the opening meeting. This helps to ensure that the audit objectives, scope, criteria, methods, schedule and any other arrangements are clearly understood and agreed by all parties. It also facilitates the exchange of information, feedback, requests, concerns and complaints during the audit process. References: = ISO 19011:2022, clause 6.4.2; PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, page 25.

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

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

References :=

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

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

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

8.1 Information stored on, processed by, or accessible via user endpoint devices shall be protected = Technological control 7.8 Equipment shall be sited securely and protected = Physical control 5.2 Information security roles and responsibilities shall be defined and allocated according to the organisation’s needs = Organisational control 6.7 Security measures shall be implemented when personnel are working remotely to protect information processed, processed, or stored outside the organisation’s premises = People control

Explanation: According to the web search results from my predefined tool, ISO 27001:2022 has restructured and consolidated the Annex A controls into four categories: organisational, people, physical, and technological12. These categories reflect the different aspects and dimensions of information security, and are aligned with the cybersecurity concepts of identify, protect, detect, respond, and recover3. The controls in each category are as follows4:

• Organisational controls: These are controls that relate to the governance, management, and coordination of information security activities within the organisation. They include controls such as information security policies, roles and responsibilities, risk assessment and treatment, performance evaluation, and improvement.
• People controls: These are controls that relate to the behaviour, awareness, and competence of the people involved in information security, both within and outside the organisation. They include controls such as human resource security, training and awareness, access control, incident management, and business continuity.
• Physical controls: These are controls that relate to the protection of physical assets and environments that store, process, or transmit information. They include controls such as physical security, environmental security, equipment security, and media security.
• Technological controls: These are controls that relate to the use of technology to implement, monitor, and maintain information security. They include controls such as cryptography, network security, system security, application security, and threat intelligence.

Based on these categories, the controls listed in the question can be matched as follows:

• 8.1 Information stored on, processed by, or accessible via user endpoint devices shall be protected: This is a technological control, as it involves the use of technology to protect information on devices such as laptops, smartphones, tablets, etc. It may include measures such as encryption, authentication, antivirus, firewall, etc.
• 7.8 Equipment shall be sited securely and protected: This is a physical control, as it involves the protection of physical assets and environments that store, process, or transmit information. It may include measures such as locks, alarms, CCTV, fire suppression, etc.
• 5.2 Information security roles and responsibilities shall be defined and allocated according to the organisation’s needs: This is an organisational control, as it involves the governance, management, and coordination of information security activities within the organisation. It may include measures such as defining the authority and accountability of information security personnel, establishing reporting lines and communication channels, assigning tasks and duties, etc.
• 6.7 Security measures shall be implemented when personnel are working remotely to protect information processed, processed, or stored outside the organisation’s premises: This is a people control, as it involves the behaviour, awareness, and competence of the people involved in information security, both within and outside the organisation. It may include measures such as providing guidance and training on remote working, enforcing policies and procedures, monitoring and auditing remote activities, etc.

References: = 1: A Breakdown of ISO 27001:2022 Annex A Controls - BARR Advisory42: ISO 27001:2022 Annex A Controls - What’s New? | ISMS.Online13: How many controls are there in ISO 27001:2022? - Strike Graph34: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, Annex A.

According to ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015, which specifies the requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems, clause 9.4.9 requires the certification body to make a certification decision based on the information obtained during the audit and any other relevant information1. The certification body should also consider the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee to address any nonconformities identified during the audit1. Therefore, when making a recommendation to the audit programme manager, an ISMS auditor should consider the nature and severity of the nonconformities and the proposed corrective actions.

Based on the scenario above, the auditor should recommend certification after their approval of the proposed corrective action plan and recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year. The auditor should provide the following justification for their recommendation:

• Justification: This recommendation is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditee has only two minor nonconformities and one opportunity for improvement, which do not indicate a significant or systemic failure of their ISMS. A minor nonconformity is defined as a failure to achieve one or more requirements of ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or a situation which raises significant doubt about the ability of an ISMS process to achieve its intended output, but does not affect its overall effectiveness or conformity2. An opportunity for improvement is defined as a suggestion for improvement beyond what is required by ISO/IEC 27001:20222. Therefore, these findings do not prevent or preclude certification, as long as they are addressed by appropriate corrective actions within a reasonable time frame. The auditor should approve the proposed corrective action plan before recommending certification, to ensure that it is realistic, achievable, and effective. The auditor should also recommend that the findings can be closed out at a surveillance audit in 1 year, to verify that the corrective actions have been implemented and are working as intended.

The other options are not valid recommendations for the audit programme manager, as they are either too lenient or too strict for the given scenario. For example:

• Recommend certification immediately: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor ignores or accepts the nonconformities, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to consider the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken by the auditee before making a certification decision.
• Recommend that a full scope re-audit is required within 6 months: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor overreacts or exaggerates the nonconformities, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to determine whether a re-audit is necessary based on the nature and extent of nonconformities and other relevant factors. A full scope re-audit is usually reserved for major nonconformities or multiple minor nonconformities that indicate a serious or widespread failure of an ISMS.
• Recommend that an unannounced audit is carried out at a future date: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor distrusts or doubts the auditee’s commitment or capability to implement corrective actions, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to conduct unannounced audits only under certain conditions, such as when there are indications of serious problems with an ISMS or when required by sector-specific schemes.
• Recommend that a partial audit is required within 3 months: This option is not valid because it implies that the auditor imposes or prescribes a specific time frame or scope for verifying corrective actions, which is contrary to the audit principles and objectives of ISO 19011:20182. It also contradicts the requirement of ISO/IEC 17021-1:20151, which requires the certification body to determine whether a partial audit is necessary based on the nature and extent of nonconformities and other relevant factors. A partial audit may be appropriate for minor nonconformities, but the time frame and scope should be agreed upon with the auditee and based on the proposed corrective action plan.

References: ISO/IEC 17021-1:2015 - Conformity assessment – Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems – Part 1: Requirements, 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.

The four options for the actions you could take are A, C, F, and G. These options are consistent with the guidance and requirements of ISO 19011:2018, Clause 6.712. You could agree with the auditee/audit client how the remaining nonconformity will be cleared, by when, and how its clearance will be verified (A), and document the agreement in the audit report1. You could close the follow-up audit as the organisation has demonstrated it is committed to clearing the nonconformities raised ©, and report the outcome to the audit client and other relevant parties1. You could note the progress made but hold the audit open until all corrective action has been cleared (F), and determine the need for another follow-up audit or other actions1. You could also advise the individual managing the audit programme of any decision taken regarding the outstanding nonconformity (G), as they are responsible for the overall management and coordination of the audit programme3. The other options are either not appropriate or not necessary for the situation. You should not recommend that the outstanding minor nonconformity is dealt with at the next surveillance audit (B), as this may compromise the audit objectives and the audit programme1. You should not recommend suspension of the organisation’s certification as they have failed to implement the agreed corrections and corrective actions within the agreed timescale (D), as this is not within your role or authority as an ISMS auditor4. You should not advise the auditee that you will arrange for the next audit to be an online audit to deal with the outstanding nonconformity (E), as this may not be feasible or effective depending on the nature and complexity of the nonconformity1. You should not conduct an unannounced follow-up audit on-site to review the one outstanding minor nonconformity once it has been cleared (H), as this may not be in accordance with the audit agreement or the audit programme1. References: 1: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 6.7 \n2: PECB Certified ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor Exam Preparation Guide, Domain 6: Closing an ISO/IEC 27001 audit \n3: ISO 19011:2018, Guidelines for auditing management systems, Clause 5.3 \n4: ISO/IEC 27006:2022, Information technology — Security techniques — Requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of information security management systems, Clause 9.6

According to ISO 19011:2018, which provides guidelines for auditing management systems, clause 6.6 requires the audit team leader to conduct a closing meeting with the auditee’s representatives at the end of the audit to present the audit conclusions and any findings1. The closing meeting should also provide an opportunity for the auditee to ask questions, clarify issues, acknowledge the findings, and comment on the audit process1. Therefore, when preparing for the closing meeting, an ISMS auditor should consider the following actions:

• I will advise the auditee that the purpose of the closing meeting is for the audit team to communicate our findings. It is not an opportunity for the auditee to challenge these: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditor has followed a systematic and consistent approach to collecting and evaluating audit evidence and reaching audit conclusions. The auditor should advise the auditee that the purpose of the closing meeting is for the audit team to communicate their findings, which are based on objective evidence and professional judgement. The auditor should also explain that it is not an opportunity for the auditee to challenge these findings, as they have already been discussed and confirmed during the audit. However, the auditor should also invite the auditee to ask questions, clarify issues, acknowledge the findings, and comment on the audit process1.
• I will schedule a closing meeting with the auditee’s representatives at which the audit conclusions will be presented: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditor has followed a planned and agreed audit programme and schedule. The auditor should schedule a closing meeting with the auditee’s representatives at which the audit conclusions will be presented, in accordance with clause 6.6 of ISO 19011:20181. The auditor should also ensure that the closing meeting is attended by those responsible for managing or implementing the ISMS, as well as any other relevant parties1.
• I will discuss any follow-up required with my audit team: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditor has followed a risk-based approach to determining and reporting any follow-up actions required by the auditee or the certification body. The auditor should discuss any follow-up required with their audit team, such as verifying corrective actions for nonconformities or conducting a subsequent audit1. The auditor should also document any follow-up actions in the audit report1.
• I will review and, as appropriate, approve my teams audit conclusions: This action is appropriate because it reflects the fact that the auditor has followed a rigorous and professional process to reaching and reporting audit conclusions. The auditor should review and, as appropriate, approve their teams audit conclusions, which are based on objective evidence and professional judgement. The auditor should also ensure that their teams audit conclusions are consistent with the audit objectives and scope, and reflect the overall performance and conformity of the ISMS1.

The audit procedure used here is "analysis." The audit team analyzed server logs to verify if they can be edited or deleted, focusing on evaluating the logs' properties and the controls over their manipulation to ensure they comply with ISO/IEC 27001 requirements.

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

The options B, D, and G are not valid audit trails because they are not directly related to the ISMS requirements or the audit criteria. They are more relevant to the human resource management or the contractual arrangements of the organization, which are outside the scope of the ISMS audit. The other options are valid audit trails because they can provide evidence of how the organization implements and maintains the ISMS controls related to access control, secure areas, and information security aspects of business continuity management. References:

• PECB Candidate Handbook ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 16, section 4.2.1
• ISO/IEC 27001:2013, clauses A.5.3, A.5.15, A.5.35, A.6.1, A.6.2, A.6.5, A.8.4, A.17.1
• ISO 19011:2018, clause 6.2.2

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