ISMS internal audit priorities

A thread on the ISO27k Forum sparked my imagination over coffee this morning.

Hope had previously asked for assistance with an ISO/IEC 27001:2022 audit plan. 

Bhushan offered a lengthy and generally sound response explaining how to use a spreadsheet with tabs to plan and record the audit work performed on 100% of the main body clauses and 50% of the 93 Annex A controls, day-by-day. That's OK ... except it wasn't entirely clear that he was interpreting and elaborating on the standard's actual requirements.

ISO/IEC 27001 does not explicitly require, for example, that (as Bhushan stated) "ALL the management system clauses from 4 to 10 AND their sub-clauses need to be listed and audited" in an ISMS internal audit, although evidently he interprets it in that way. In clause 9.2.1, the standard states a requirement for internal audits to provide information on whether the ISMS conforms to the organization’s own requirements for the ISMS plus the requirements of the standard, and is effectively implemented and maintained. There is no "ALL" in the standard's main body clauses. Spreadsheets are not mentioned at all, not even once.

While 100% audit coverage of ALL the mandatory requirements would be one way to demonstrate conformity, clause 9.2.2 hints at an alternative approach: "When establishing the internal audit programme(s), the organization shall consider the importance of the processes concerned and the results of previous audits." I would argue that it is therefore acceptable to audit only the 'main' (most important) ISMS processes and pick up on any issues noted in previous audits - not just internal audits by the way.

That, in turn, begs questions about what are the most important things to audit, the priorities. When scoping and preparing for an ISMS internal audit, I typically start by reviewing all available information about the ISMS including previous audit files, reports, findings, recommendations, ISMS changes, strategies, policies, management reviews, preventive and corrective actions and so on. Although I'm a voracious reader, there is so much information to review that it normally spills over into the audit fieldwork phase, asking questions and examining further evidence about any emerging concerns or issues. 

In practice, I can't reasonably expect to cover 100%, so I prioritise the stuff (not just 'the processes concerned') that I believe is most important in context, typically the areas that seem to present the greatest information risks and/or where the audit can hopefully add the most value to the business. Occasionally, it might also involve specifically looking into certain aspects that the client's senior management considers priorities, without compromising my independence as an auditor.

That's simply how I do it. Although I believe it satisfies the ISO/IEC 27001 requirement, I freely admit that it goes beyond the mandatory minimum in my quest to add value to the business. The challenge, always, is to make the best use of the available resources - particularly the time - and the opportunity.

Prioritisation applies also to auditing the information risks and security controls: again, the standard does not formally demand that they are 100% audited. In fact, it doesn't literally demand that they are audited at all! I use my discretion in practice. Rather than attempting to cover ALL the risks and controls, I might, for example, take a deep dive into the information risk and security aspects of 'joiners, movers and leavers' to explore the nature and quality of the organization's HR arrangements - its policies, procedures and practices, including conformity, documentation and broader issues such as governance and relationships with other departments/service providers. 

This is a typical form of 'audit sampling': rather than attempting to audit everything (which implies fairly superficial coverage given the constraints of the audit), I pick out just a few aspects to review in detail as a way to explore and learn about the organisation's approach in general. Subsequent audits would probably pick on different aspects, as well as following-up on the findings of previous audits.

Finally, prioritisation comes into play in the audit analysis and reporting phases. It is unhelpful to attempt to report 'everything', not least because so much of the information comes from the auditee. There is no point reproducing the previous audit reports etc., and I am unlikely to list the items of information I obtained and reviewed, except perhaps in a general sense when explaining how the audit was performed and when citing specific items of evidence to support my findings.

Hmmmm, so does that answer Hope's original request for assistance? Not quite. There is one more thing. What is an 'audit plan', in fact? Again, referring to ISO/IEC 27001 in the first instance, clause 9.2.2 starts "The organization shall plan, establish, implement and maintain an audit programme(s), including the frequency, methods, responsibilities, planning requirements and reporting." In that sentence, 'plan' is a verb concerning the process of preparing "an audit programme(s)". Since 'programme' is not formally defined in the standard, the normal dictionary definition or understanding applies. Google tells me that one of the Oxford Languages definitions of a programme is "a set of related measures or activities with a particular long-term aim". 

So, strictly speaking, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 does not specify an 'audit plan' at all. We should really have asked Hope to clarify the original request for assistance rather than assuming what was meant. Is 'plan' the same as 'programme'? Have we adequately described either one? You tell me! Comments welcome ...  

Popular posts from this blog

Pragmatic ISMS implementation guide (FREE!)

Image
Early this morning ( very  early!) I remotely attended an ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27/WG 1 editing meeting in London discussing the planned revision of ISO/IEC 27003:2017 . Overall, the meeting was very productive in that we got through a  long  list of expert comments on the preliminary draft standard, debated the objectives of the project and the standard and reached consensus on most points. In summary: 27003 is to be revised to align with the current 2022 releases of ISO/IEC 27001 , 27002 and 27005 : These changes are  mostly  minor aside from the new section 6.3 on ISMS changes.
Read more

Two dozen information risks that ISO forgot

Image
Selecting the wrong controls - controls that are inappropriate, ineffective, too costly, impracticable, fragile, unnecessary, counterproductive or whatever, often as a result of blind faith in fads and fashions of the day and FOMO e.g. MFA, AI, cyber Failing to select the right controls - controls that are ideal for the particular situation, both now and in perpetuity, for whatever reason - mostly ignorance and prejudice Selecting and implementing controls at the wrong time or in the wrong way (where 'wrong' includes ineffective, inappropriate, sub-optimal e.g. bolting on controls rather than designing and building them in) Inept and inaccurate identification, analysis and quantification of risk, including reliance on p oor quality (incomplete, inaccurate, out of date, misleading, unreliable ...) information about actual risks, particularly subtle and emerging risks plus those involving deliberate concealment and misdirection e.g. fraud, misinformation, disinformation, propagan
Read more

Philosophical phriday - compliance risk

Image
According to a vendor's promotional video interview I saw recently, the 'cybersecurity compliance burden' has allegedly become so significant that [customer] organisations are eagerly buying [their] software tools and services to help them manage and fulfil their obligations. The vendor's argument goes that, instead of accumulating a ragtag bunch of policies and other controls relating to user Identification and Authentication (I&A), for instance, it makes sense to:  Identify all the cybersecurity-related laws, regulations and standards that apply to the organisation; Examine them for any security control requirements relating to, say, I&A; Rationalise the I&A controls down to the smallest set that satisfies all the requirements - the lowest common denominator; Design, implement, use, manage and maintain those I&A controls; Have the I&A controls checked or audited to gain assurance that the compliance requirements are met.  OK so far? Sounds reasonab
Read more

Reading between the lines of ISO27001 [L O N G]

Image
ISO/IEC 27001 is a succinct, formally-worded standard for two key reasons: It is deliberately generic, being applicable to all manner of organisations regardless of difference in location/s, size, industry, maturity, structure, information risk and security status ... and so on. In effect, it specifies the lowest common denominator - the things that ALL organisations should be doing to manage their information security controls, as a minimum. The hurdle is set low enough that every organisation ought to find value in designing, implementing and operating an I nformation S ecurity M anagement S ystem as laid out in the standard. It is a certifiable standard, explicitly specifying the characteristics that every certified organisation's ISMS is expected to have. Again, it is a minimal specification with no concept of typical, average or maximum security: that is entirely down to the organisations themselves to determine, following the information risk management processes minimally de
Read more

Passionate dispassion

Image
Someone who is actively involved in, or is managing, an activity is patently not independent of it. They may well make a conscious, rational and determined effort to be objective, dispassionately reviewing evidence etc ., but their subconscious/emotional biases/prejudices and beliefs/value-systems will inevitably influence what they do. With the best will in the world, they will struggle to challenge and assess their past decisions and activities, especially if they were "certain" or "determined" or genuinely believed they were "doing the right thing". Furthermore, it is very hard for anyone to review the things they did not do, decisions they did not make or options they did not even consider. Mostly, they remain out of sight or out of the question.
Read more

45 ISO Management Systems Standards

Image
The ISO website  currently lists 45 published M anagement S ystems S tandards: 1. ISO 7101:2023 Healthcare organization management — Management systems for quality in healthcare organizations — Requirements 2. ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems — Requirements 3. ISO 10012:2003 Measurement management systems — Requirements for measurement processes and measuring equipment 4. ISO 13485:2016 Medical devices — Quality management systems — Requirements for regulatory purposes 5. ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems — Requirements with guidance for use 6. ISO 14298:2021 Graphic technology — Management of security printing processes
Read more

Philosophical phriday - a noncompliance ramble

Image
In a previous philosophical phriday post , I moaned about vendors of security compliance support/management tools and services over-promising and under-delivering - an admittedly biased, even cynical opinion piece about the compliance imperative . A recent article in Corporate Compliance Insights notes that "CISOs are not just defenders against cyber threats but also champions of compliance and operational resilience". Hmmm, are CISOs 'compliance champs', really? Today, I'm discussing alternatives to being compliance-driven. How else can organisations drive their information risk, security and related concerns in a positive direction?
Read more

Adaptive SME security Crowdstrike special

Image
As if on cue, along comes a golden opportunity to consider what the Adaptive SME security  approach has to say regarding the Crowdstrike incident: That's not 20/20 hindsight but foresight: I've picked out the most relevant rows from the security controls table published in the guide 24 hours before the incident.  Although Crowdstrike primarily supplies much larger enterprises than SMEs, the incident could equally have afflicted other security software, or indeed operating systems such as Windows and assorted cloud apps commonly used by SMEs. Regardless of the details, it is a wake-up call, an opportunity to consider and respond to the information risks ... and to adapt , accordingly.
Read more