Pass the PECB ISO 27001 ISO-IEC-27001-Lead-Auditor Questions and answers with CertsForce

The benefits of implementing an ISMS primarily result from a reduction in information security risks. E. The purpose of an ISMS is to apply a risk management process for preserving information security. : According to the ISO 27001 standard, the benefits of implementing an ISMS include the following1:

Assuring customers and other stakeholders of the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information

Enhancing the ability to respond to information security incidents and minimize their impacts

Improving the governance and management of information security

Reducing the costs and losses associated with information security breaches

Increasing the competitiveness and reputation of the organization

Complying with legal, regulatory and contractual obligations The purpose of an ISMS is to provide a systematic approach to managing information security risks, based on the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle1. The ISMS enables the organization to establish, implement, maintain and continually improve its information security performance, in alignment with its business objectives and the needs and expectations of interested parties1. The ISMS consists of the following elements1:

The information security policy and objectives

The scope and boundaries of the ISMS

The processes and procedures for information security risk assessment and treatment

The resources and competencies for information security

The roles and responsibilities for information security

The performance evaluation and improvement of the ISMS

The internal and external communication and awareness of the ISMS References:

ISO/IEC 27001:2013, Information technology — Security techniques — Information security management systems — Requirements, clauses 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10

PECB Candidate Handbook ISO 27001 Lead Auditor, pages 9-11

ISO/IEC 27001:2013 Information Security Management Standards

4 Key Benefits of ISO 27001 Implementation | ISMS.online

ISO/IEC 27001:2022

An Introduction to the ISO 27001 ISMS | Secureframe

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

B. Correct Answer: The certification agreement is between the certification body and the organization (Cobt), not the auditor. Therefore, Sarah’s withdrawal does not impact the certification agreement itself.

A. Incorrect: Sarah does not need approval from the certification body to withdraw, as she had not yet signed the certification agreement.

C. Incorrect: The certification agreement is not dependent on a specific auditor; it is an agreement between the organization and the certification body.

Relevant Standard Reference:

ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Clause 9.2 (Internal Audit) & ISO 19011:2018 Clause 6.4.10 (Conducting Closing Meetings)

According to ISO 27001:2022 Annex A Control 8.30, the organisation shall ensure that externally provided processes, products or services that are relevant to the information security management system are controlled. This includes developing and entering into licensing agreements that cover code ownership and intellectual property rights, and implementing appropriate contractual requirements related to secure design and coding in accordance with Annex A 8.25 and 8.2912

In this case, the organisation and the developer have performed security tests that failed, which indicates that the secure design and coding requirements of Annex A 8.29 were not met. The IT Manager explains that the encryption and pseudonymization functions failed because they slowed down the system and service performance, and that an extra 150% of resources are needed to cover this. However, this does not justify the acceptance of the test results by the Service Manager, who is not authorised to approve the test according to the software security management procedure. The Service Manager should have consulted with the IT Manager, who is the owner of the process, and followed the procedure for handling nonconformities and corrective actions. The Service Manager’s decision to continue the service based on access control alone exposes the organisation to the risk of compromising the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of personal data processed by the mobile app. Therefore, there is a nonconformity (NC) with clause 8.1, control A.8.30.

According to ISO 27001:2022 Clause 8.1, the organisation shall plan, implement and control the processes needed to meet information security requirements, and to implement the actions determined in Clause 6.1. The organisation shall also control planned changes and review the consequences of unintended changes, taking action to mitigate any adverse effects, as necessary12

In this case, the organisation has not controlled the planned change of the mobile app from version 1.0 to version 1.01, which was a minor update provided by the outsourced developer in response to frequent ransomware attacks. The IT Manager explains that the developer performed an emergency release of the updated software, and gave a verbal guarantee that there will be no impact on any security functions. However, this is not sufficient to ensure that the change is properly assessed, tested, documented, and approved before deployment. The IT Manager should have followed the change management process and procedure, and verified that the updated software meets the security requirements and does not introduce any new vulnerabilities or risks. The IT Manager’s reliance on his 20 years of information security experience and the developer’s verbal guarantee is not a valid basis for skipping the re-testing of the software. Therefore, there is a nonconformity (NC) with clause 8.1.

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.

The integrity principle of information security has been affected in this case. The chatbot’s inability to provide accurate answers and its unintended behavior (sending random files) due to insufficient testing and lack of proper training samples compromised the integrity of the system.

Jack collected mathematical evidence when he identified nonconformities by comparing the number of purchased invoices for software licenses with the software inventory. This type of evidence involves numerical, quantifiable data that highlights discrepancies and supports findings of compliance or non-compliance.

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, one of the professional behaviours expected from an audit team leader is to be decisive, which means to “reach timely conclusions based on logical reasoning and analysis” (page 8). Being open minded, ethical, and perceptive are also desirable qualities for an audit team leader, but they do not match the description given in the question. References: PECB Candidate Handbook for ISO/IEC 27001 Lead Auditor, page 8.

According to the PECB Candidate Handbook1, audit team leaders should have the following additional knowledge and skills compared to auditors:

•Plan the audit, including preparing the audit plan, assigning work to the audit team members and coordinating their activities

•Make effective use of resources provided to the audit, such as personnel, time, budget and equipment

•Manage the audit process, including leading the opening and closing meetings, directing the audit team, resolving conflicts and ensuring the audit objectives are achieved

•Review and approve the audit report and audit findings

•Communicate with the client and other interested parties throughout the audit

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.

The audit team employed an evidence-based approach, making option A the correct answer. This is explicitly demonstrated throughout the scenario and aligns directly with ISO 19011:2018, which defines evidence-based auditing as one of the fundamental principles of auditing management systems. An evidence-based approach requires that audit conclusions are based on verifiable information and objective evidence rather than assumptions, opinions, or hypothetical scenarios.

In the scenario, the audit team clearly states that only information capable of being verified to some extent was considered valid audit evidence. This reflects the ISO 19011 requirement that audit evidence should be verifiable, relevant, and based on samples of available information. The auditors documented observations, inspection notes, asset inventories, and firewall configurations, all of which are tangible and verifiable sources of audit evidence. Even in situations where evidence was difficult to verify, the auditors applied professional judgment to assess reliability, which is consistent with the principle of due professional care rather than speculative analysis.

Option B is incorrect because a risk-based approach focuses on prioritizing audit activities based on risk levels, not on how conclusions are reached. While risk awareness may influence audit planning, it does not define the method of forming conclusions. Option C is incorrect because hypothetical analysis is not recognized as an acceptable audit method under ISO standards. ISO audits must be grounded in factual, verifiable evidence.

Therefore, the audit team’s systematic reliance on verifiable information confirms that an evidence-based approach was used.

Furthermore, Jack’s understanding of NightCore’s organizational context, management practices, and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements demonstrates competence in applying audit criteria within the organization’s specific environment. His ability to exercise professional judgment when evidence is difficult to verify further supports his suitability as an audit team leader.

Option A is incorrect because Jack’s experience spans multiple relevant domains, not just a few limited areas. Option B is incorrect because auditor competence is not based solely on understanding organizational structure; it requires a broader combination of auditing, technical, and contextual knowledge, all of which Jack clearly demonstrates.