No existe tal definición de "acciones susceptibles de producir impactos" dentro de la ISO 14001. Se trata de un concepto mayormente empleado en las evaluaciones de impacto ambiental y son las actividades, operaciones, procedimientos, aspectos, elementos, etc. de un proyecto que se relacionan de alguna forma con el medio ambiente, y que por lo tanto, producirán de manera directa o indirecta, cambios (impactos) en el entorno.
Dentro de los requisitos de ISO 14001:2015 la organización debe de determinar los aspectos ambientales significativos, es decir aquellos que generan un mayor IMPACTO en el medio ambiente conforme a unos criterios establecidos por la propia organización (por ejemplo frecuencia de ocurrencia de un aspecto ambiental, etc) . Este impacto es el cambio que se produce en el medio ambiente, ya sea adverso o beneficioso, y resulta del aspecto ambiental asociado a una actividad o proceso.
Answer
You cannot say that one is superior than the other, because they are different. ISO 9001:2015 is applicable to all types of companies in all industries, whereas ISO 17025:2015 is only applicable to testing and calibration laboratories. If your organization is a testing and calibration laboratory ISO 17025 is a requirement.
Thank you so much for the best recommendation. Currently I'm on going with the Foundation Course.
Spreading a set of internal audits all over the year
Answer
Yes, the whole system can be audited through a set of internal audits spread all over the year. And for internal auditors with lack of experience that is a great help because they can focus their preparation, performance and reporting on a focused audit scope.
Is it true that a company can be certified in ISO 27001 only in a part of the organization? That is, for example, only the Systems area?
Answer:
Your understanding is correct. The ISMS scope can cover all organization, or only specific locations, processes or information.
The main point when considering this approach is the effort required to keep the ISMS scope separated from the rest of the organization's elements (for small and mid-sized organizations many times the effort is not worthy, and it is better to include all the organization in the ISMS scope)
ISO 27001 is a standard focused on protection of information, so possible applications of ISO 27001 for this organization (if I understood correctly, it provides physical security services) are:
- protection of sensitive information known by physical security guards about facilities, processes or people from their clients (e.g. through which route will the money be delivered, how it will be protected, and who will be driving), by means of training and employment contract clauses.
- provision of proper physical protection of information of their clients (e.g., equipment and methods for protection of their premises, or during assets transportation, etc.).
1. Does the internal auditor has to have a FORMAL training (should be formally certified of some sort) in order to conduct the internal audits? I found no evidence for that in any of the 9.2 clause.
Answer:
According to ISO 27001 (clause 7.2) competence can be demonstrated by means of education, training or experience. Considering that, an internal auditor does not need to have a formal training if he can demonstrate his competence by other means (e.g., an degree which includes education on auditing topics, or previous experience on auditing ISO 27001 management systems).
2. Should the information security policy be signed by CEO? Again I found no evidence for that – only "Top Management".
Answer:
By top management you must consider the highest level of the organization related to the ISMS scope. If the organization is included in the ISMS scope this person would be the CEO, however if only part of the organization is included in the ISMS scope this person may be someone else. Please note that for small and mid-sized organizations, due to their size, the most common is that the CEO signs the information security policy, no matter if the scope of the ISMS is the whole" organization or not.
Employee private devices
Answer:
By including private devices in your asset register would mean that all information on them (both company and private) would have to be treated according company security rules, and this will add unnecessary effort and complexity to your ISMS (because users' private data).
A better approach would be not include the private devices in your asset register and identify the risk that business data can be accessed by private devices. This way you can focus on protecting only the business data, and this can be done by means of implementing a BYOD policy.
This website stores cookies on your computer. These cookies are used to collect information about how you interact with our website and allow us to remember you. We use this information in order to improve and customize your browsing experience and for analytics and metrics about our visitors both on this website and other media. To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy.
If you decline, your information won't be tracked when you visit this website. A single cookie will be used in your browser to remember your preference not to be tracked.