Start a new topic and get direct answers from the Expert Advice Community.
CREATE NEW TOPIC +Search results
11277 results
Guest
Guest
Create New Topic As guest or Sign in
Assign topic to the user
-
Is it an NC
I'm not sure if I understood your question well, but if the provider of training services has signed a contract with the customer where it has obliged to comply with certain requirement, then it must comply with it - otherwise this is a nonconformity.
The point is, a company must comply with all of these: ISO 27001 + laws & regulations + contractual obligations + its own policies and procedures.
This article can also help you: Major vs. minor nonconformities in the certification audit https://advisera.com/27001academy/blog/2014/06/02/major-vs-minor-nonconformities-in-the-certification-audit/ -
27001 Scope
There might be a serious problem with this reduced scope for the ISMS. Due to the need for connexion with the two other sites, the reduced ISMS scope might be not feasible. This decision should be reviewed and justified.
You may consider the two other sites as external, but the complexity is in the close interactions in/out/in-out that is continuous or at least continual. When describing the scope, you should also clearly describe what is in and what is out.
When there are connections with other entities (be they from the same company or external) you should identify and describe the interfaces with the associated risks of information coming in and going out. Identifying the communic ation channels and the associated risks is also important, depending on the responsibility for protection the ISMS scope has. In your case, you have to use both directions.
In any case, it is easier to have all the 4 locations within the scope.
This post on the blog can also help you: Problems with defining the scope in ISO 27001:
https://advisera.com/27001academy/blog/2010/06/29/problems-with-defining-the-scope-in-iso-27001/ -
ISO 27001 / Planned intervals
Management review must be performed at least once a year.
By the way, if your top management doesn't care at all about your information security, then you have a serious problem - therefore, a management review shouldn't be just another compliance job, but a serious consideration from the management point of view on how your security is performing.
This article can also help you: Why is management review important for ISO 27001 and ISO 22301? https://advisera.com/27001academy/blog/2014/03/03/why-is-management-review-important-for-iso-27001-and-iso-22301/ -
Context and scope of the ISMS / ISO 27001 v 2013
So we would suggest you avoid the risk analysis or any deep consideration of what if at this stage and concentrate on identifying the issues. Personal data, sensitive customer ideas and IPR, financial information, brand, codebases etc? Therefore consider any existing issues of: recruitment e.g. -
On-line transactions
Answer:
1. Transactions (e.g. financial) are one of the types of services, but the standards does not focus on them. One may of course only think about that, but why narrowing the scope of application services and forgetting issues? I dont think any list will be exhaustive.
Other transactions can be any direct exchange of data, such as credentials for requesting access to a distant system, answers to an line o a poll or survey, uploading files to a cloud server, etc.
2. However, ISO27001:2013 (and ISO 27002:2013 that provides the details of Annex A) doesnt speak about this anymore and widens largely the scope of this control. It relates with all kinds of applications and services that pass over the public service.
Please remember that the title of the clause is System acquisition, development and maintenance.
Some examples of application services: Games, Streaming videos, E-learning, On- line registration and acquisitions, Telephony services, Establishing and managing a radio communication between a control tower and an aircraft.
Best regards
Jean-Luc -
Managing records
Answer: I'm not sure what exactly would you like to specify in this procedure, but ISO 27001 requires you to specify how the records are stored and protected, how the changes are controlled, how long they are kept, how are they disposed of, etc. - our Procedure for Document and Record Control suggests that all these requirements are described in other policies and procedures which require the creation of certain records. -
ISO 27001 Controls Effectivenes Measurement
Hi Kaoutar
You only have to implement the controls that are required by the risk assessment/treatment. (ISO27001:2013 only list 114 controls).
However, ISO 27001 doesnt require to measure and monitor all controls. You have to decide which are important to you to achieve your business objectives and control your risks (your security objectives).
2. The selected controls should
- be activated
- reach the objective they are aiming to (perform and action, reduce a risk, etc.)
- the objectives you set should always be measurable otherwise you never know they are effective.
The metrics depend on the control. Would you provide us with a pair of examples we can give a closer answer.
Refer to our post: https://advisera.com/27001academy/blog/2012/04/10/iso-27001-control-objectives-why-are-they-important/
Best regards -
Physical security Policy
Hi Vijay
- CCTV is not a requirement in ISO 27001. You should implement this cotnrol when the risk assessment pushes you to it.
- The two issues you present is not an incident, but a non conformity. An incident is 'en event that prevents you from reaching your objectives'.
- I do not really understand what you mean by 'compensating controls' in this case. if you provide more details I'll be able to answer.
Regards
Jaan-Luc -
Access controlAlign IT services continuity with ISO 22301
ISO 24762:2008 is withdrawn (see here: https://www.iso.org/standard/41532.html so ISO 27031 is the most relevant standard now for technology aspect of business continuity. -
Vocalbulary
ESPAÑOL: evaluación de riesgos
What is the difference?
but we have another terms for : ENGLISH accountability, responsible
ESPAÑOL : responsabilidad
What is the difference? Please, can you help me explain how this use it?"
Answer:
I refer here to the ISO definitions (we gathered all risk related definitions from 31000, 27000 and old 27005 in the 2WD 27005).
1a risk evaluation
"process of comparing the results of risk analysis (3.10) with risk criteria (3.13) to determine whether the risk and/or its magnitude is acceptable or tolerable"
NOTE to entry 3.14 Risk evaluation assists in the decision about risk treatment.
[ISO Guide 73:2009, definition 3.7.1] »
1b risk assessment
"overall process of risk identification (3.15), risk analysis (3.10) and risk evaluation (3.14)"
[ISO Guide 73:2009, definition 3.4.1]
So, risk assessment is a meta-process and risk evaluation is an activity/process part of risk assessment.
2. The term Accountability isnt much liked and we find it scarcely in the WG1 documents. It has a much wider meaning than Responsibility.
Responsibility is a generic term associated with a role, like telling which objectives should be reached. Accountability has a financial and legal aspect; if the objectives are not met, the responsible person my be asked to pay in money or with a legal suite.